Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A divine person is essentially eternally omnipotent and exists necessarily.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Necessary existence is a modal property that cannot be derived analytically from the concept of divinity without begging the question.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Kant demonstrated in the Critique of Pure Reason that existence is not a predicate, making 'necessarily exists' an incoherent essential property.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If necessary existence were analytically contained in 'divine person,' the ontological argument would be trivially valid, which even theists like Plantinga deny.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Process theology (Whitehead, Hartshorne) holds that genuine divinity entails creative responsiveness to the world, which is incompatible with immutable omnipotence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being essentially and eternally omnipotent cannot be affected by or genuinely related to contingent creatures, undermining the relational personhood essential to Trinitarian theology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hartshorne's dipolar theism shows that classical essential omnipotence conflicts with the social, responsive nature of divine personhood that Swinburne himself requires for the Trinity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • A divine person is naturally understood as one who is essentially eternally omnipotent and exists (in some sense) 'necessarily'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.