# God is without passions



## athanatos (May 9, 2011)

Found in both:
WCF — Chapter II: Of God and of the Holy Trinity
LBCF — Chapter II: Of God and of the Holy Trinity

is the phrase:
"a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions"

I am not sure I understand the "passions." The context is prior to mentioning distinction of persons within the Godhead. That said, surely we want to admit that God has anger, for He is furious with our sin; He has loving kindness, for He bears with great patience and mercy those who commit sins.

Is this a statement against patripassionism, or something in that vein? That is, that we do not affirm that God suffers (particularly the Father did not suffer on the Cross)?


----------



## au5t1n (May 9, 2011)

I recommend reading this all the way through: God Without Mood Swings


----------



## Notthemama1984 (May 9, 2011)

passion=an out of control emotion. Or at least that is what I have been told.


----------



## au5t1n (May 9, 2011)

This will help too: http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/figurative-descriptions-god-48694/


----------



## KMK (May 9, 2011)

austinww said:


> This will help too: Figurative Descriptions of God



This thread should serve as marking the boundaries of any discussion of the affections of God here on PB.


----------



## Osage Bluestem (May 9, 2011)

When we get angry we become passionate against our will. We are moved by our emotions to feel something.

God is not like that. He is not moved by external forces or by emotions. He is a certain way because that is the holy and righteous way to be. So if God is angry it is not because something happened that forced him by surprise into anger. He is angry because that is the perfect way to be regarding a situation so he is angry in full control of the situation in righteousness.


----------



## athanatos (Jun 7, 2011)

austinww said:


> I recommend reading this all the way through: God Without Mood Swings


Thanks 



austinww said:


> This will help too: http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/figurative-descriptions-god-48694/


Thanks!



Osage Bluestem said:


> When we get angry we become passionate against our will. We are moved by our emotions to feel something.
> 
> God is not like that. He is not moved by external forces or by emotions. He is a certain way because that is the holy and righteous way to be. So if God is angry it is not because something happened that forced him by surprise into anger. He is angry because that is the perfect way to be regarding a situation so he is angry in full control of the situation in righteousness.


 
So, as Boliver was saying, "passion" is used in contrast with lack-of-self-control. As in "crimes of passion", as opposed to "premeditated"...


----------



## Philip (Jun 7, 2011)

athanatos said:


> is the phrase:
> "a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions"
> 
> I am not sure I understand the "passions."



Is it using passion in the old sense of "suffering" maybe?


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Jun 7, 2011)

The Confessions don't define passion as "an out of control emotion" (though it is true there is no such thing in God), but rather what is meant is a _change_ in emotion. The concern of the Confessions, therefore, is regarding the _immutability_ of God. Sure God's _dealings_ with creation change, but there is no such thing as "passion" in God, for it proposes a change in God's _character_.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jun 7, 2011)

The absence of passions deals with impassibility, not immutability.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Jun 7, 2011)

Chaplainintraining said:


> The absence of passions deals with impassibility, not immutability.


 
It does both. It's just logical that attributing "passions" to God attacks His immutability.


----------



## py3ak (Jun 7, 2011)

Richard Muller, _PRRD_ 3:309-311



> It is worth noting here that the Reformed orthodox theologians do not typically argue "impassibility" as an attribute. [They mostly speak of immutability. -RZ] (...) ...those writers who refrain from using the term _impassibilitas_ are also quite adamant in stating that God has no _passiones_.
> (...) The meaning and connotation of the terms _passio, patibilitas_ and _passivitas_ in the Western and Christian philosophical tradition is quite important here: as Weber points out, "passion signifies, together with passivity, and in correlation with 'action/activity,' the property of a subject which, through an action exerted by an exterior agent, receives a determinate quality and, in the reception, is altered by it. (...) Certainly the denial of _passiones_ to God ... has primarily to do with the assumption that finite creatures do not alter the divine being or add new properties to it....


----------



## athanatos (Jun 7, 2011)

P. F. Pugh said:


> athanatos said:
> 
> 
> > is the phrase:
> ...


That is my original speculation, yet it would refer to the divine nature being without suffering -- but because of hypostatic union God suffered in the flesh. The Father and the Holy Spirit did not suffer (the heresy which says that the Father suffered is patripassionism).



py3ak said:


> Richard Muller, _PRRD_ 3:309-311
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
Fascinating quote. That makes good sense, and lines up with David (osage)'s post, in some respect. But this is much clearer and definitive.


----------



## py3ak (Jun 7, 2011)

It should be noted, however, that the attribution of affections to God is figurative, not proper. Muller again, _PRRD_ 3:552 - 'As Ames indicates, "The affections attributed to God in scripture, such as love, hatred, and the like, either designate acts of will or apply to God only figuratively."' If you can read pp.551-561 of the cited work it will probably resolve most questions.

Passion is related to the concept of suffering in that it is something that originates without and terminates within: whether you conceived of that in terms of pain or of anything inflicted on God, it would be incompatible with His immutability.


----------



## MW (Jun 7, 2011)

The phrase is drawn from the thirty nine articles and precedes the divines who drafted the Westminster Confession. However, as a part of synchronic analysis, it may be useful to consider how one of the drafting committee would have understood the word "passions." Edward Reynolds provides a full and general description in his treatise on the passions and faculties of the soul (Works, vol. 6):



> Passions are nothing else, but those natural, perfective, and unstrained motions of the creatures unto that advancement of their natures, which they are, by the wisdom, power, and providence of their Creator, in their own several spheres, and according to the proportion of their capacities, ordained to receive, by a regular inclination to those objects, whose goodness beareth a natural convenience or virtue of satisfaction unto them; — or by an antipathy and aversation from those, which bearing a contrariety to the good they desire, must needs be noxious and destructive, and, by consequent, odious to their natures. This being the property of all unconstrained self-motions, it followeth, that the root and ground of all passions, is principally the good; and secondarily, or by consequent, the evil of things: as one beareth with it 'rationem convenientiae,' a quieting and satisfactory, — the other, 'rationem disconvenientiae,' a disturbing and destroying, nature.



Three characteristics of this description help to focus attention on the reason why passions cannot be applied to God: (1) that advancement of their natures; (2) ordained to receive, by a regular inclination to those objects ... or by an antipathy and aversation from those; and (3) a quieting and satisfactory ... a disturbing and destroying, nature. In contrast to these characteristics which belong to passions, (1) God is perfect and unchangeable. (2) He relates to all His creatures by the freedom of His will, not by an act of nature or necessity. (3) He is blessed for ever, rests in His own all-sufficient and everlasting life, and cannot be essentially disquieted or disturbed.


----------



## athanatos (Jun 10, 2011)

Thanks for all your help


----------

