Journal: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal
Volume: DBSJ 29:1 (NA 2024)
Article: The Problem Of A Temporal Incarnation And A Perichoretic, Eternal God: Evaluating Leibniz And Rahner
Author: Brett J. Williams

DBSJ 29 (2024) p. 99

The Problem Of A Temporal Incarnation And A Perichoretic, Eternal God: Evaluating Leibniz And Rahner

Brett J. Williams1

Introduction

The first line in John Donne’s seventeenth-century Holy Sonnet XVI reads, “Father, part of his double interest, unto thy kingdom, thy Son gives to me, his jointure in the knotty Trinitie.”2 Donne used the analogy of a Celtic knot to loosely signify the persons of the triune Godhead.3 Fred Sanders has recognized this metaphor of the “knotty Trinitie” as a “poetic rendering of the doctrine of perichoresis.”4 If, as perichoresis stipulates, the persons of the trinity exist in circumincession, then they must have an inseparable, eternal nature. The classical understanding of eternity, that is a duration-less, atemporal, simultaneous possession of life, can only apply to the Triune.5 God is outside of time and duration. How then can one of the persons of the triune Godhead become temporal while remaining essentially atemporal and divine? If the incarnate Son experiences time and has temporal attributes (e.g., duration), should that be extrapolated to the other divine persons? If so, how then can the classical notion of eternity, that is divine atemporality, stand? Nelson Pike said, “It could hardly escape notice that the doctrine of God’s timelessness does not square well with

DBSJ 29 (2024) p. 100

the standard Christian belief that God once assumed finite, human form. As a man of course, God had both temporal extension and temporal location.”6 What problems arise with such a question, and can these be overcome?

The purpose of this brief essay is to explore several key issues regarding the temporal/atemporal perichoretic relationship of the incarnate Son with the other divine persons.7 It will begin by examining two primary arguments against a temporal/atemporal perichoretic relationship. Second, this essay will review several classic arguments in favor of the orthodox view with an explanation of the divine-temporal relationship. Third, it will survey three primary biblical passages that deal specifically with the temporal relationship of the Father and Son. Finally, it will provide a general evaluation, incorporating historical arguments, and interacting with all sides, stressing strengths and weaknesses. It will be demonstrated, in all, that a correct understanding and application of the hypostati...