Divine simplicity doctrine itself requires God to be beyond property-instantiation, so identifying persons with property instances entails God cannot be a person—a theologically unacceptable result.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Divine simplicity doctrine(the main concept being critiqued in this statement): A traditional theological belief that God is completely unified and has no separate parts—God's essence (what God is) is identical to God's existence (that God is), unlike creatures who have distinguishable qualities.
Persons (in philosophy)(what God is being debated to be in this argument): Beings that have self-awareness, consciousness, and the ability to think and make choices—typically referring to individual thinking beings like humans or God.
Property-instantiation(describing how things possess qualities or attributes): When something has a specific quality or characteristic—for example, a ball instantiates (has) the properties of being round and being red.
Theologically unacceptable(describing why this particular logical outcome is problematic for believers): A conclusion that contradicts core beliefs within religious faith and would be rejected by theologians as incompatible with religious doctrine.

Based on where you are in your exploration