ABSTRACT This essay’s aim is to demonstrate how recent defenses of divine simplicity have failed to address the prevailing challenge of analogical language, and thereby render much of their argumentation for simplicity’s appropriateness in Christian theology null-and-void. For this task, three book-length works published within the last few years are examined: Steven Duby’s Divine Simplicity: A Dogmatic Account, D. Stephen Long’s The Perfectly Simple Triune God: Aquinas and His Legacy, and Jordan Barrett’s Divine Simplicity: A Biblical and Trinitarian Account. The (...) first section briefly details what each author understands divine simplicity to characterize, and how that characterization involves the pivotal denial of God belonging to any genus. The second section addresses the extent to which each author provides an answer as to how one can analogically speak of a simple God. Finally, the third section critiques the kinds of analogical positions found in Thomas Cajetan’s influential De Nominum Analogia, showing that they do not provide a sufficient analogical framework to ground intelligible propositions or inferences about a simple God, which thereby places the original three authors’ defenses in danger of serious incoherence. (shrink)

In a recent essay of the AJTP, Wesley Wildman takes his reader through a three-step program—indeed, a “user-friendly guide”—for apprehensive theologians who are looking for a means to deny the indeterminacy of God against Robert C. Neville’s systematic and elegant argument for it.1 The “path of resistance” isn’t one that Wildman himself takes seriously—to be sure, his tongue is firmly in cheek throughout the short essay—but he thinks it could have some therapeutic potential for the beleaguered theologian who is struggling (...) with Neville’s challenge. Upon completing the program, the theologian can rest easy that her preferred view of God can be sustained. Of course, if this is the final position of the theologian, she... (shrink)

The aim of Brandon Daniel-Hughes’s book is to explore the following provocative hypothesis: religious communities are communities of inquiry. As suggested by the title, the writings of C. S. Peirce provide the primary resources and rationale for this claim; his ideas on belief, habit, community, continuity, pragmatism, semiotics, and inquiry are deeply constitutive of the project. And for the most part, Daniel-Hughes’s integration produces a compelling read; however, that is not always the case, especially concerning the notion of religious inquiry’s (...) “primary referent”. Nonetheless, Daniel-Hughes brings forth a fascinating and fecund interpretation of religious practice that will be valuable to... (shrink)

Utilizing the philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce, Rory Misiewicz argues for a new approach to the problem of theological language in Christian theology. This approach, the "analogy of signs," serves as a critical alternative to influential models of theological language based upon an analogy of being, grammatical analogy, or analogy of faith.