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
    The Son possesses the property of aseity despite being ge... — Carmelics
    Home/Trinity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The Son possesses the property of aseity despite being generated by the Father.

    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.The Son, being God, must have the property of aseity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Father's generation of the Son doesn't explain the Son's existence, but only the Son's being a person distinct from the Father.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the Father's generation explained the Son's existence, that would rule out the Son's aseity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aseity (existence a se) classically means existing from oneself, requiring no external principle whatsoever for one's being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The Father is an external principle that is the source of the Son's hypostatic existence, constituting a real relation of dependence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A being that derives its personal subsistence from another cannot coherently be said to exist a se, even if its essence is shared.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas holds that in God, relation and essence are identical, so the Son's real relation of origin to the Father is not separable from what the Son is.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the Son's relational dependence on the Father is constitutive of the Son's very being as Son, then aseity cannot apply to the Son as such without contradiction.
      ?

      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

    A being that derives its personal subsistence from another cannot coherently be ...Aquinas holds that in God, relation and essence are identical, so the Son's real...Aseity (existence a se) classically means existing from oneself, requiring no ex...If the Father's generation explained the Son's existence, that would rule out th...
    +4 moreShow less
    If the Son's relational dependence on the Father is constitutive of the Son's ve...The Father is an external principle that is the source of the Son's hypostatic e...The Father's generation of the Son doesn't explain the Son's existence, but only...The Son, being God, must have the property of aseity.

    Similar

    The Son, being God, must have the property of aseity.91%If the Father's generation explained the Son's existence, that would r...77%There is an essential asymmetry in the knowing relation.74%Christ therefore has one particular nature.72%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: trinity
    Mooney
    View source passageHide passage
    Mooney argues that this account also solves problems relating to divine processions and aseity. The Son, being God, must have the property of aseity. But Mooney suggests that the Father’s generation of the Son doesn’t explain the Son’s existence (which would rule out the Son's aseity), but only the Son’s being a person distinct from the Father (12).
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises are all present in the source passage and jointly support the conclusion: since the Father's generation explains only the Son's distinctness (not existence), aseity is preserved, which is exactly the argument Mooney is reported as making.

    Confidence: The argument is clearly attributed to Mooney and the logical structure is explicit in the text.

    Details

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