Talk:self-existent

Interesting, I would love to read here some history of the word. According to Mirriam Webster it was first used in 1693 though others are more cautious and put forward later dates. None of them cite the source however. I am aware that William Romaine in the 18th century used the word in respect of the Lord Jesus Christ whom he described as self-existent based upon the Lord's words to the Jews: Before Abraham was, I am found in John's gospel. It was also used in 1822 in a similar vein in a confession of faith found in a trust deed, a copy of which I have inspected. The document is not publicly available.

The use of it by William Romaine and the drafters of the deed in 1821 suggest that word may not have meant in its earlier days what we understand by it today, but without additional examples of its use it is not possible to say. Whilst, in our understanding of the word, the one true God is self-existent, ie subsists in and of himself, the Persons of the Trinity are co-existent, being members of the Trinity and each deriving existence from the self-existence of the triune God.

Romaine may be found here: https://apuritansmind.com/the-christian-walk/the-self-existence-of-the-son-by-william-romaine/ on John 8:24. where he says of the Son: "[his] existence is necessary and underived." This together with the premise that what is self-existent must be God, leads him to insist upon the self-existence of the Son. He sees it as a very necessary, indeed essential doctrine. Is it? He thinks so and uses the self-existence of the Son, which he derives from the Lord’s use of I AM, to prove his divinity, which of course is the necessary thing to believe.

Interestingly if the earlier date for its first use is correct, and the word was more widely known we might wonder why what is translated as self-existent in the modern edition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith used a different set of words in 17th century English: God...['s] subsistence is in and of himself. Instead of using the one word self-existent, if it existed at the time, the writers used a fuller expression, which agrees with our understanding of the word. This further suggests that the word originally had a different meaning. Of course it is impossible to know without further citations.

Finally, the inclusion of a comparative and superlative form of the adjective is rather self-contradictory. A thing is either self-existent or it has a derived existence. It is nonsense to say that A is more self-existent than B. The truth of the matter is that the most self-existent thing is as self-existent as the least self-existent.

I intend to add this to the Talk page not to the Entry. Stuartm (talk) 14:44, 11 August 2021 (UTC)