Kline and procession

Discussion in 'Pneumatology' started by TimV, Jan 13, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. TimV

    TimV Puritanboard Botanist

    From a current thread. Should we change all of our most ancient and basic Confessions to make Kline apologists happy? Or am I misreading what Kline is saying?

    From the WCF (and just about every other orthodox confession except those of the East who (I think) still leave the last three words out):

    Kline as quoted by Rev. King

    So, it is advisable and perhaps even necessary to incorporate Kline's theory into our most basic creeds that would read how? The filioque is the last three words of

    So, would it look like this?

     
  2. turmeric

    turmeric Megerator

    Thanks, Tim, I was hoping for a thread on this. :popcorn:
     
  3. ADKing

    ADKing Puritan Board Junior

    As has been mentioned on the other thread, Kline's proposal is more like the Son was begotten of the Father and Spirit. Begetting and Procession are different (even if it is mysterious to us how!). Nevertheless, this serves to obsucre the personal properties of the persons. The language of Father and Son communicates something. If, as Kline suggests, the Spirit also begets the Son this becomes less meaningful. Plus there is added confusion in that the Father and the Spirit beget the Son but the Father and the Son spirate the Spirit. This is certainly not an advance over the Nicene creed and suggests that its author is not very well versed in the detailed arguments of the Nicene and Cappadocian fathers on the importance of the personal properties.
     
  4. toddpedlar

    toddpedlar Iron Dramatist Staff Member

    Can you give a rundown of what Kline's argument is for saying this? Where in Scripture is there any indication of the Son being anyone's "begotten" than the Father's?
     
  5. ADKing

    ADKing Puritan Board Junior

    Essentially Kline argues that the economic relations of the persons of the Trinity reveal something about their ontological relationships. This idea is orthodox in church history. The Son's pouring out the Spirit and breathing him upon the disciples was an argument put forward to demonstrate that there must be an onotological reality lying behind that. Kline takes this one step further. He argues based on Luke 1.35 that the Spirit, involved in the conception of Christ, economically must have been involved ontologically. He then proceeds to say,

    "Supporting this proposal, there is another economic anologue for the immanent order of Spirit and Son, with the Spirit as subject and the Son as object. This analogue is found in the messianic sonship of Jesus (cf. Ps 2:7; Matt 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22; Rom 1:3,4). The Spirit performs the anointing of Jesus whereby he is constituted the Christ-Son of God (cf. Isa. 61:1-3; Luke 4:18,19), a process manifested in the avian descent of the Spirit on Jesus at his baptism (Matt 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22; John 1:32-34) and the transfiguring overshadowing of Jesus by the Glory-Spirit on the holy mountain ..."

    However, Kline's approach serves rather to confuse rather than to elucidate the personal properties.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page