CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Karl Barth and Christian TheologyMedieval Philosophy and TheologyStudy and Philosophy of Religion

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Simply Impossible: A Case against Divine Simplicity

Open access
Mullins, R. T.·2013·Journal of Reformed Theology
DOI 10.1163/15697312-12341294
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Within contemporary philosophical theology the doctrine of divine simplicity has regained attention.1 The pertinent literature has increased by several new defenses of the doctrine.2 One of the more surprising, and troubling, aspects of the contemporary defenses amongst Christian philosophers and theologians is a seeming lack of understanding about how radical the doctrine of divine simplicity truly is. As such, I wish to do a few things in this paper. First, systematically articulate the doctrine of divine simplicity. Second, argue that divine simplicity is not a possible perfection. Third, offer some concluding remarks and highlight remaining issues that will need to be sorted out for the debate over simplicity to meaningfully continue.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/15697312-12341294

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Classical theists like T.J. Mawson also affirm that the universe is God's body.

    “Further, classical theists like T.J. Mawson also affirm that the universe is God ' s body.”

    From The Difficulty with Demarcating Panentheism (2016) · cites this paper as [56]

    In “Simplicity is Not a Possible Perfection” (page unavailable), the paper discusses God creating universes, not the universe as God's body. Searches for “Mawson” and “body of God” found no passage attributing that view to Mawson or to classical theists. (LLM, conf=0.73)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Rogers, Perfect Being Theology, 27. The types of objections she has in mind come from Alvin Plantinga and Thomas Morris. Alvin Planinga, Does God Have a Nature? (Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1980).Thomas Morris, Anselmian Explorations: Essays in Philosophical Theology (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1987).
  2. Katherin Rogers, Perfect Being Theology (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2000), 2.
  3. Brower, 'Simplicity and Aseity,' Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology, 107.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Mullins, R. T.
Affiliations
University of Notre Dame (US)
Corresponding author
Mullins, R. T.
ORCID
Mullins, R. T.
Venue
Journal of Reformed Theology
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2013
Volume
7
Issue
2
Pages
181-203
ISSN
  • 1569-7312 (ISSN-L)
  • 1872-5163
DOI
10.1163/15697312-12341294
OpenAlex
W2092167979
Cited by
35
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
7.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Reformed Theology (publishedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Karl Barth and Christian Theology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Medieval Philosophy and Theology
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
Keywords
divine simplicity, divine perfection, divine attributes, Christian philosophy of religion, theological metaphysics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review