The participant with the most points wins.
Voting stays open until 2 more votes are cast.
Match format
Pro
#1
"Orthodox" Christianity says God is one nature, 3 persons, one being.
Following this logic humanity is one nature, 8 billion persons, one being.
Persons of the same nature are not the same being unless something connects them other than their nature.
Con
#2
In God each person possesses the one infinite and immutable divine nature and is therefore one being.
In God we see Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. They all possess the same nature as well. We would agree that all humans have the same nature, being human. In God, each person possesses the nature of God. With humans, their nature is to be one being. This is the nature of being human, a distinct being as well as a distinct person. But in God, you have distinct persons; but because their nature is to be God, they have one being.
Pro
#3
It is insufficient to simply say that part of God nature is to be one being even if there are 3 persons. You have not demonstrated how 3 persons can be one being. God is even less able to be one being in 3 persons than a human unless you have modalism (God is one person with multiple forms or split personalities). The reason is due to the principle of divine simplicity, God cannot be made of parts and that includes different persons. Thomist divine simplicity completely collapses either way, but in Scotist divine simplicity the persons are only "formally distinct". Palamite divine simplicity comes the closest to explaining it with essence-energies distinction but God has personally informed me that western Christianity is more correct.
Con
#4
First, let us look at the definition of “being” since this seems to be what this debate has been focusing on so far. Wiktionary gives us 5 definitions:
Definition 1 isn’t going to help because “creature” has the same root as “create,” and God is the one uncreated Being. Definition number 5 is obsolete and has nothing to do with this debate, so we will definately ignore it. In my opinion, definition 4 is probably the best.
“And in one Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, the only-begotten, born of the Father before all ages. Light from light, true God from true God, begotten, not made, one in essence with the Father; through Him all things were made.”
The Son is of the same essence as the Father, therefore one being. Your human analogy just doesn’t work. Human are all different, it is part of their basic nature. But God’s nature is not to be different but the same. I’ll explain it more clearly. The nature of a human is to be a distinct human, but each person of the Trinity has the simple nature of being God, which makes them the same being.
Also, you said that the Trinity would make God divided, but this is absolutely false. Each person of the Blessed Trinity is fully God. This doesn’t mean God is composed of parts. Modalism, on the other hand, would make parts of God and give Him different roles.
Finally, I’m not sure what you mean when you say “God has personally informed me that western Christianity is more correct.”
If you believe that the Bible is God’s word, then I can use arguments from the Bible too.
Pro
#5
FORFEITED
Con
#6
“Settle with your opponent quickly while on the way to court with him. Otherwise your opponent will hand you over to the judge, and the judge will hand you over to the guard, and you will be thrown into prison.
Amen, I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last penny.” (Matthew 5:25-26)
The bible says to sell all you have and give to the poor. A theocracy forces this. Sounds like Karl Marx doesn't it?
Communism is godless. Your argument falls apart.
Religion is a communist scam!
| Criterion | Pro | Tie | Con |
|---|---|---|---|
| Winner |
