Time&Eternity

13. Ibid., 65.
14. Ibid., 66.
15. Ibid., 75.
16. Ibid., 89.
17. Ibid., 68.
18. Ibid., 72.
19. Ibid., 76.
20. Ibid., 72.
21. Ibid., 73.
notes to chapter 4 303
22. i = √–1,
a = real part of z, b = imaginary part of z.
23. One should remember that imaginary is not synonymous with false or unreal, but
is rather a precisely defined term.
24. The extent to which the model of the complex plane is also applicable to the relationship
of time and eternity is something that would need to be considered. Cf. on this
also Ewald, “Bemerkungen zum Begriff von Raum und Zeit,” who attempts to regard the
creation of the cosmos ex nihilo as a transformation of complex, unreal solutions of field
equations into real solutions. The fact that space and time can be mathematically exceeded
makes it easier to understand eternity as something that embraces space and time.
25. Cf., e.g., Link, Schöpfung, esp. 400–454. Within the framework of his theology of
creation, Link sees the common horizon of scientific and theological thinking in the question
of time.
26. As Schwöbel also emphasizes in Trinitarian Theology Today, in the criticism of
philosophical theism, one should not forget the commendable role that it played during the
seventeenth century, the century of the wars between Christian denominations (8f.). The
attempt to distinguish a general, timeless conception of God from historical, secondary, denominationally
shaped contents of such concepts helped to establish a common ground for
society. The doctrine of the Trinity was thereby pushed into second place, however.
27. Schwöbel, “Christology and Trinitarian Thought,” 141.
28. The concern here is not with a general overview of the theological discussion of the
Trinity during, e.g., the second half of the twentieth century. For such an overview, cf.,
e.g., Peters, GOD as Trinity, esp. 81–145, or Schwöbel, Trinitarian Theology Today, 1–30,
148–56.
29. Gunton, “The Trinity, Natural Theology,” 88–103.
30. Vanhoozer, “Does the Trinity Belong in a Theology of Religions?,” 41–71.
31. D’Costa, “Trinitarian Différance and World Religions.”
32. Ricoeur, Soi-même comme un autre, 140ff., etc.
33. Vanhoozer, “Does the Trinity Belong in a Theology of Religions?,” 65.
34. Ibid., 66.
35. Gunton, “The Trinity, Natural Theology,” 103.
36. Gunton, The One, the Three and the Many, 214.
37. Gunton, “Relation and Relativity.”
38. Ibid., 101.
39. Ibid., 106.
40. Ibid.
41. Ibid., 109.
42. Ibid., 100.
43. Johnson, She Who Is, 192.
44. Ibid., 203.
45. Ibid., 196f.
46. Ibid., 216.