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
    'Every divine person is a god' is not true by definition. — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    'Every divine person is a god' is not true by definition.

    Trinity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.'Divine' can mean 'relating to a god' without being a god.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In this common meaning of 'divine', the Persons of this theory are 'divine' without themselves being gods.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Analogously, a hand can be 'human' without itself being a human being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The classical tradition (Athanasius, Aquinas) holds that 'divine' said of a Person predicates the divine essence, not merely a relation to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'divine person' only means 'person related to a god', Trinitarian theology collapses into a form of subordinationism the councils explicitly condemned.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The hand analogy fails because hands share human nature derivatively, whereas Trinitarian Persons are said to share the numerically identical divine substance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Predicate logic requires that if 'divine' is a natural-kind term applied essentially to the Persons, it carries ontological rather than merely relational import.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Frege and later Geach argue that sortal predicates like 'divine' used in theological identity statements must determine a kind, making 'a divine person is a god' analytic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Topics

    Trinity

    Related

    'Divine' can mean 'relating to a god' without being a god.Analogously, a hand can be 'human' without itself being a human being.Frege and later Geach argue that sortal predicates like 'divine' used in theolog...If 'divine person' only means 'person related to a god', Trinitarian theology co...
    +4 moreShow less
    In this common meaning of 'divine', the Persons of this theory are 'divine' with...Predicate logic requires that if 'divine' is a natural-kind term applied essenti...The classical tradition (Athanasius, Aquinas) holds that 'divine' said of a Pers...The hand analogy fails because hands share human nature derivatively, whereas Tr...

    Similar

    A divine person is naturally understood as one who is essentially eter...82%A divine person is essentially eternally omnipotent and exists necessa...82%In this common meaning of 'divine', the Persons of this theory are 'di...77%'Divine' can mean 'relating to a god' without being a god.77%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: trinity
    No, because 'divine' can mean relating to a god (without being a god)...
    View source passageHide passage
    The account is not polytheism because only the Trinity is God, and because of the necessary unity of the three (160, 167). But isn’t “Every divine person is a god” true by definition? No, because “divine” can mean relating to a god (without being a god), and in this common meaning the Persons of this theory are “divine”. Similarly, a hand can be “human” without itself being a human being (165).
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises faithfully reflect the passage's reasoning that 'divine' need not entail 'being a god,' supported by the hand/human analogy, which directly supports the conclusion that 'Every divine person is a god' is not true by definition.

    Confidence: Explicit argument rebutting a possible objection, with analogy as supporting premise.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit