Classical theism is a family of views that by its very nature is broad enough to include various theological “schools.” Classical theists should feel free to inhabit Thomism, Scotism, or other variegated traditions without immediate worry that they are no longer inhabiting the classical Christian tradition.

Classical theism, given its storied tradition, has many robust definitions throughout the ages. They are worth re-reading and slowly unpacking. Consider the below two examples as entryways into understanding it. First, John of Damascus (675/76–749) says:

So then, we both know and confess that God is without beginning, without end, eternal and everlasting, uncreated, immutable, unchangeable, simple, non-composite, incorporeal, invisible, impalpable, uncircumscribed, limitless, ungraspable, incognizable, unfathomable, good, just, almighty, the creator of all created things, sovereign over all, overseeing all, exercising foresight over all, having supreme power over all, and judge of all.

Similarly, Augustine explains:

Thus we should understand God, if we can and as far as we can, to be good without quality, great without quantity, creative without need or necessity, presiding without position, holding all things together without possession, wholly everywhere without place, everlasting without time, without any change in himself making changeable things, and undergoing nothing.

These descriptions are quite similar. Both stack up terminology about what God is. God is without need, beginning, or end. He is perfect, omniscient, ​omnipotent, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent. Such a description of classical theism as a model is a fair starting point. But other models also want to say that God is perfect, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent. Therefore, to understand classical theism, we need to know what makes it unique. Traditionally, what has set classical theism apart is that it also claims that God is simple, immutable, impassible, and eternal. It is these four attributes that comprise the uniqueness of classical theism and mark it off as a distinct model of God.

…Classical theism was the primary model of God for most of Christian history. Isolating classical theism from orthodox Christian doctrines of the incarnation, atonement, and the like into a generic theism would allow for Platonic, Neoplatonic, and Aristotelian philosophy and for many Jewish and Muslim thinkers to be categorized as “classical theists” as well. But since I am defining classical theism within a Christian context that requires other classical doctrines like those found in the Apostles’ Creed, pagan Platonists or Muslims are not categorized as classical theists. They may hold some classical doctrines, but they reject others.

Despite widespread agreement among classical theists, there is room to question and provide alternative explanations for a simple, immutable, impassible, and eternal God. By this I mean that there is no uniform explanation for what divine simplicity or what divine impassibility must exhaustively mean within the classical tradition. While there are guardrails and views that are decidedly nonclassical, there are various strands and textures throughout the tradition.

…Classical theism is also unbound by the technical scholastic distinctions and their meanings as found in Thomism—actuality, potentiality, matter, form, substantial form, and the like. This doesn’t mean these terms are irrelevant or should be cast aside. They can be, and often are, of great service to classical theism. Their vocabulary and “grammar” are ubiquitous. But the doctrinal formulations of these terms as found in orthodox Thomism are not all necessary conditions for classical theism. For example, it is not necessary to follow the Thomist maxim that all physical bodies have only one substantial form. Pluralism about substantial forms is not inconsistent with classical theism. But even more, Thomism can be quite variegated itself! So, even if Thomism were flexible enough to be used interchangeably with classical theism, if one is really dedicated to getting into the weeds of Thomism, one will find further bewildering complexity. But this is true of any school of thought within the classical tradition. The point is this: Classical theism is a family of views that by its very nature is broad enough to include various theological “schools.” Classical theists should feel free to inhabit Thomism, Scotism, or other variegated traditions without immediate worry that they are no longer inhabiting the classical Christian tradition.

Read More