GodLogic Trapped by His Own Words | Hashim | Speakers Corner

Summary

This conversation delves into the theological concepts of self-existence and the relationship between God the Father and Jesus, particularly focusing on the nature of the Trinity. The dialogue explores the meaning of 'self-existent' in terms of divine essence, where Jesus, sharing the same essence as the Father, is seen as self-existent in his divine nature. However, the Father eternally generates the Son, raising questions about their distinct roles and the ontological dependence of Jesus on the Father. The discussion contrasts human dependence on parents with divine relations, addressing complex theological points on generation and existence.

Takeaways

• 😀 The debate centers around the concept of 'self-existence' or 'aseity,' with a focus on whether Jesus shares this attribute with the Father.
• 😀 'Aseity' refers to being self-existent, without dependence on anything outside of oneself, particularly in relation to Jesus and the Father.
• 😀 The discussion differentiates between ontological self-existence (essence) and hypostatic properties (relational roles within the Trinity).
• 😀 Ontologically, Jesus and the Father share the same essence, meaning Jesus is self-existent (ase). However, relationally, Jesus is eternally begotten of the Father.
• 😀 The concept of 'eternal generation' is debated, with the speaker emphasizing that Jesus’ eternal generation refers to relational properties, not a deficiency in His existence.
• 😀 A key question arises about whether the Son can exist without the Father, leading to confusion about the difference between ontological essence and hypostatic relations.
• 😀 The participants argue that Jesus, being the same essence as the Father, is not ontologically dependent on anyone, even though relationally, He is eternally generated by the Father.
• 😀 The dialogue attempts to clarify the difference between 'essence' (nature of being) and 'personhood' (hypostatic properties) within the context of the Trinity.
• 😀 There is a comparison made between human beings being contingent upon their parents for existence and the divine nature of Jesus, which does not depend on anyone else in the same way.
• 😀 Confusion arises around the language of 'generating forever,' with one speaker questioning if this implies incompleteness or an inability of the Son to be fully generated.
• 😀 The dialogue reflects on the complexity of understanding the eternal relationships within the Trinity and the difficulty of explaining these concepts in simple terms.

Q & A

What does 'self-existent' mean in the context of the discussion?

In this discussion, 'self-existent' refers to a being whose existence is not dependent on anything or anyone outside of itself. It implies that the essence of that being exists independently and does not rely on external sources.

Does Jesus have self-existence like the Father?

The discussion implies that Jesus shares the same divine essence as the Father, which means that He is also self-existent in terms of His essence, similar to the Father. However, the relationship between the Father and the Son involves the Father eternally generating the Son, which reflects relational properties rather than ontological independence.

What is meant by 'eternal generation' in relation to the Father and the Son?

Eternal generation refers to the relationship in which the Father eternally generates the Son. This is viewed as an ongoing relational action rather than a one-time creation, meaning that the Son's existence is eternally dependent on the Father within their dynamic relationship.

What role does 'hypostasis' play in this theological discussion?

Hypostasis refers to the personal subsistence or reality within the Trinity. It concerns the distinct persons of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, while their shared essence or nature remains the same. The Father and Son have different roles (e.g., the Father generates the Son), but they share the same essence.

Can the Son exist without the Father?

No, according to the discussion, the Son cannot exist without the Father. The Son's existence is eternally dependent on the Father, as He is generated by the Father and is not self-existent in the same way the Father is.

What is the distinction between ontological self-existence and relational properties?

Ontological self-existence refers to a being's essence or nature, which exists independently and is not contingent on anything else. Relational properties, on the other hand, refer to how persons within the Trinity relate to each other, such as the Father eternally generating the Son, which is a relational action rather than ontological independence.

Why is Jesus considered self-existent despite being generated by the Father?

The distinction is made that while Jesus is eternally generated by the Father, He shares the same divine essence as the Father, which makes Him self-existent in terms of essence. The eternal generation process reflects their relational roles, not a dependence on an external source for existence.

What does the conversation mean by 'source' in relation to Jesus?

In this context, 'source' refers to the Father as the origin of the Son's existence. The Father is considered the source of Jesus' eternal generation, but this refers to relational generation, not ontological dependency.

How does the conversation distinguish between the Father and the Son regarding their existence?

The Father is described as self-existent and not dependent on anyone for His existence. In contrast, the Son is eternally generated by the Father, but because they share the same essence, the Son is also self-existent in terms of essence, though His existence is dependent on the Father in a relational sense.

What does 'Aset' mean in this theological discussion?

'Aset' is used as a term for self-existence, referring to ontological self-existence in this context. It signifies that a being's essence is independent and does not rely on anything external to itself. Both the Father and the Son, by virtue of sharing the same divine essence, are considered to have 'Aset.'