Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that The Father and Son share a single divine substance (homoousios), which on relative identity accounts makes them the same God while distinct persons.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Relative identity (X=Y in respect R, X≠Y in respect S) lacks consensus in formal logic and metaphysics; applying it to God is philosophically controversial.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If Father and Son are literally the 'same God,' calling them 'distinct persons' risks incoherence—personhood seems to require some form of distinctness.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
This view requires accepting metaphysical categories (substance/person) that may not apply univocally to transcendent being, limiting explanatory power.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Relative identity allows X and Y to be identical in one respect (substance) while distinct in another (personhood), avoiding strict contradiction.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Homoousios affirms genuine metaphysical unity; persons could be 'same God' while maintaining real distinctions via relational properties.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
This framework preserves both biblical monotheism and New Testament distinctions between Father, Son, and Spirit better than pure modalism.
?
How convincing is this?
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.