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
    God is free not to create, so the object of his necessary... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→It is impossible for God to be a single Person; the concept of a unipersonal God is incoherent.

    God is free not to create, so the object of his necessary love need not be a creature.

    Trinity
    ?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.

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

    Topics

    Trinity

    Related

    If God is perfectly loving by his very nature, he must eternally be giving himse...It is impossible for God to be a single Person; the concept of a unipersonal God...Therefore, the other to whom God's love is necessarily directed must be internal...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Trinity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    If God is perfectly loving by his very nature, he must eternally be gi...76%The Persons can love, while God (the divine nature) cannot.75%It is inconceivable that a divine Person should flourish without lovin...74%Divine love does not imply further Persons beyond those already implie...71%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: trinity
    View source passageHide passage
    Like Swinburne (see section 2.3) Craig argues that it is impossible for God to be a single Person because “if God is perfectly loving by his very nature, he must [eternally] be giving himself in love to another” (593). And since God is free not to create, but must be loving another, “the other to whom God’s love is necessarily directed must be internal to God himself” (ibid.). For Craig this is a plausibility argument rather than a strict proof, in support of the claim that the concept of unipersonal God is incoherent. Unlike Swinburne, he does not seem to think that this argument is importa...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective