This thesis presents a case for the traditional doctrine of divine simplicity by construing it along the lines that God exists as actus purus. My formulation of divine simplicity draws upon the medieval insight that God is what He is in virtue of what He does in one, eternal act of will with which He is identical. In chapter I, I survey the contemporary literature on divine simplicity. In chapter II, I critique Alvin Plantinga??s Platonic theory of the divine attributes as formulated in Does God Have a Nature? I contend it brings with it the cost of abandoning the doctrine of God??s aseity, as well as a problematic understanding of the very notion of what it means to claim that God has a particular property. In chapter III, I provide rejoinders to all of Plantinga??s defeaters against divine simplicity. I argue that by understanding the origin of God??s attributes to be the result of what He does, Plantinga??s two major criticisms against divine simplicity fail. In chapter IV, I develop a viable theory of divine simplicity, given an actus purus conception of God, and I formulate a number of arguments supporting it. By drawing upon the resources of action theory, I clarify, in detail, what exactly it means to claim that God is identical with His act of will. And I demonstrate the fruitfulness of an actus purus construal of divine simplicity by showing how it solves a large number of problems that theists face.In the last chapter, I note some of the difficulties with my position due to its commitment to an eternal God, and I suggest some of the ways that these problems can be overcome. However, in addition to showing the difficulties that face my position, I also demonstrate the rich number of implications that follow from it. As such, I seek to demonstrate that the traditional understanding of the divine essence is something that is worthy for theists to embrace and to explore, because it is full of truth and wisdom that deserves to be preserved for later generations to celebrate and enjoy.

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This study will contribute to the substantial corpus of secondary scholarship on the life, ministry, and theology of the German theologian, church leader, and modern-day martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945). Bonhoeffer’s legacy has also elicited considerable interest in the South African context, concerning a wide variety of themes such as the Confessing Church movement, secularisation, discipleship, confessing guilt, spirituality, and ethics. The critical question articulated by Bonhoeffer predominantly in his Letters and Papers from Prison, namely ‘Who is Jesus Christ, for us, today?’ has been raised by different generations of South African theologians in rapidly changing contexts. This study will concentrate on Bonhoeffer’s own Christology. The focus will be not so much on the significance of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ within a particular social context, but on how Bonhoeffer understands the person of Christ. More specifically, the problem investigated in this study is how Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s evolving views on the so-called ‘two natures’ of Christ should be understood. The Nicene confession,’ that Jesus Christ is Lord, that he is ‘truly God’ and ‘of one being with the Father, ’ prompted considerable reflection in Patristic Christianity. One crucial question was how the confession of the divinity of Christ reconciles with the humanity of Jesus of Nazareth portrayed so vividly in the canonical gospels. The formulation of the Council of Chalcedon, namely that one may speak of ‘two natures’ and ‘one person,’ has never been satisfactory and prompted further controversy but remains a point of reference in ongoing Christological debates to this day. The question, therefore, raised: How does Bonhoeffer understand the relationship between the ‘divine’ and the ‘human’ nature of Jesus Christ? This question is pertinent given the consistent Christological concentration in Bonhoeffer’s theology (even to the point of a Trinitarian reductionism), his increasing emphasis on a ‘this-worldly’ understanding of God’s transcendence and his consistent Lutheran intuition that the finite can indeed contain the infinite. Bonhoeffer’s Christology has been the subject of much scholarly interest. There is consensus that his Christology remains not only incomplete but also unresolved. A core problem in this regard is his understanding of the divine nature of Christ – which he assumes but of which he does not offer any full account. This study will contribute to the available literature by exploring Bonhoeffer’s understanding of the ‘two natures’ of Christ based on the primary and secondary research with specific reference to Sanctorum Communio (1927/1963), Act and Being (1930/1996), Christology, Discipleship (1937/1959), Ethics (1955, 6th edition and 2005, new critical edition) and Letters and Papers from Prison (2010). There has been considerable controversy in Bonhoeffer scholarship regarding the continuity and discontinuity in Bonhoeffer’s theological thinking from his student years to his death in 1945. It would, therefore, be wise to allow for Bonhoeffer’s ‘evolving’ views on the ‘two natures’ of Jesus Christ to speak for itself. This study will seek to describe and assess (in terms of Bonhoeffer’s sources and secondary scholarship) Bonhoeffer’s views in each of his main works to trace the developments in his thinking.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-29T14:27:20Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Pedro Savelli.pdf: 1178771 bytes, checksum: e340079926a5e9d29ae08f90eefddb56 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-11-17 / Deification: in the ecstatic love of God we are deified to be in communion with His life and nature. The Perspective of the Deification opens three paths for the human being to be conscious of taking part of the divine nature: a) through the way of Life. We only exist by virtue of the kindness of God. Out of nothing, He calls everything to the light: the work of the Creation expresses the Will of God, everything belongs to Him and from Him receives the natural deification; b) through the way of Revelation. The people from Israel knew how to interpret its own history as a singular election of God, whose objective is to be the light to the nations: deification by the obedience to the listening of the Word of God. c) Through the way of Grace: Reincarnation and Glorification of the Christ-Sacrament. Father God, in the mystery of His donation to the humanity, invites us to participate in His divine nature, transformed by the Son in the strength of the Hole Spirit: covering us of Christ by the Baptism and feeding us from Him by the Eucharist: sacramental deification. In Christ, Head, the Church is Sacrament. It updates the deifying Grace through the Spirit, celebrating the liturgy, particularly, the Eucharist: it is in the latter that we find ourselves / Deificação: no amor extático de Deus somos deificados para estarmos em comunhão com a Sua vida e natureza. A Perspectiva da Deificação abre três caminhos para o humano tomar consciência de participar da natureza divina: a) pelo caminho da Vida. Existimos somente pela bondade de Deus. Ele do nada, chama tudo à luz: a obra da Criação expressa a Vontade de Deus, tudo pertence a Ele e Dele recebe a deificação natural; b) pelo caminho da Revelação: o Povo de Israel soube interpretar a própria história como uma eleição particular de Deus, cuja finalidade é ser luz às nações: deificação pela obediência à escuta da Palavra de Deus. c) Pelo caminho da Graça: Encarnação e Glorificação de Cristo-Sacramento. Deus Pai, no mistério de sua doação à humanidade, convida-nos a participar de Sua natureza divina, transformados pelo Filho na força do Espírito Santo: revestindo-nos de Cristo pelo Batismo e alimentando-nos Dele pela Eucaristia: deificação sacramental. Em Cristo, Cabeça, a Igreja é Sacramento. Ela atualiza pelo Espírito a Graça deificante, celebrando a liturgia, em particular a Eucaristia: é neste último caminho que nos encontramos