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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The three hypostases of the Trinity are three particular divine substances with distinct properties

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Cappadocian Fathers (esp. Basil of Caesarea) distinguish hypostasis from ousia precisely to avoid tritheism, not to affirm three substances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If three hypostases entail three particular substances, the unity of divine essence collapses into three separate gods, which orthodox Trinitarian theology explicitly rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Philoponus's Aristotelian framework maps onto Trinitarian doctrine only by importing a genus-species structure that makes the divine essence a universal shared by three individuals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's own doctrine of primary substance requires spatial and temporal individuation, conditions that are categorically inapplicable to immaterial, eternal divine persons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Applying Aristotelian substance categories to the Trinity commits a category error identified by Augustine: divine simplicity entails that God has no accidents, leaving no principled basis for distinguishing Aristotelian individuals within the Godhead.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Hypostasis is not an accident of divinity
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If hypostasis is not an accident, it must be a primary substance in the Aristotelian sense — an individual organic being
      ?

      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.