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
    In various places Hasker says the Persons are constituted... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→It is unclear what constitutes the Persons in Hasker's account.

    In various places Hasker says the Persons are constituted by the divine mind/soul, the concrete divine nature (a trope of divinity), and a single mental substance.

    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

    It is unclear what constitutes the Persons in Hasker's account.These would appear to be different claims.

    Similar

    If the divine nature/soul is the source of God but is not itself God, ...82%

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Trinity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    On Hasker's theory, the soul (a.k.a. the divine nature) is the source ...81%
    Christ is both fully human (a body-soul composite) and fully divine (G...80%
    Being a divine Person requires being a form-(quasi-)matter compound, w...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: trinity
    View source passageHide passage
    Daniel Howard-Snyder objects that Hasker’s talk of the nature “supporting” or “sustaining” the lives or “life-streams” of the Persons is unintelligible (2015b, 108–10). He also argues that it is unclear quite what constitutes the Persons, as in various places Hasker says that this is the divine mind/soul, the concrete divine nature (a trope of divinity), and a single mental substance–and these would appear to be different claims (110). Also, monotheism uncontroversially implies that there is exactly one god. But Hasker forbids saying that any of the Persons is a god. And by definition being a ...

    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