Nature, Identity and God: The logical consistency of the Trinity

When talking about God there first must be a distinction made between nature and identity in order to not "trip over our own shoelaces"

Nature is not the same as identity. Nature speaks to "what" something is. Identity speaks to "who" that something is. Now when I use the word "something" I do not mean simply a "some thing". I am speaking, instead, about reality. So when I say "nature" and "identity" I am talking about, in this case, the nature and identity of God, or the "what" of God and the "who" of God.

Because of the text of the scriptures and the fact that trinitarian's wish to remain true to the grammar...especially when pronouns are used and when there appears to be a subject/object distinction between the Son and the Father. Now, how are we to define this subject/object relationship between the Son and the Father? We are left, without a doubt, an ontological dilemma because the bible clearly teaches monotheism but also maintains the distinctive personal integrity of three realities, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. So it behooves us to make careful nuanced distinctions about what appears to be the case.

And what is that case?

1. That there is one God.
2. The Father is God and appears to possess personal abilities
3. The Son is God and appears to possess personal abilities
4. The Holy Spirit is God and appears to possess personal abilities.

Also,

5. The Father appears not to be the same person as the Son or the Holy Spirit
6. The Son appears not be the same person as the Father or the Holy Spirit
7. The Holy Spirit appears not to be the same person as the Father and the Son.

Since I want to be consistent with how the text "appears" I want to collate this information without creating a contradiction and without mixing categories.

Trinitarians do this by using the categories of nature and identity.

Number 1 is conveying "what" God is or nature.

Numbers 2-7 convey "who" God is or identity.

Nature is not the same as identity, therefore there is no contradiction and no mixing of categories. It protects monotheism and the personal integrity of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. If the integrity of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit is a desired motivation when reading the text then a trinitarian conclusion MUST be the correct conclusion and one that everyone should come to.

The Concept of "Persons" and the Trinity

Probably the most problematic pattern appearing in our culture is the annulment of the "person." Though, unwittingly, the pattern might be sewn into the fabric of our culture, it is still ubiquitous in the threading of society and human behavior is directly related to the idea of "personhood." If I have a high idea of "personhood" then I will naturally treat "persons" according to such an idea. If my idea of "personhood" is low or even mechanistic in nature then suffice it to say I will treat my "neighbor" consistently with that idea also.

The value of a "person" is "self evident" in the selfish ego, for even a socio-path, who who may not value other "persons" puts high value on one "person," namely himself.  So we can see that even though a culture may jade the concept of "personhood" the "persons" within culture are still selfish enough to protect their own "personal" autonomy or value. They may not value others but they value themselves.

"Persons" are important to God. Although it can be said that all creation is important and valued by God, a "person" is a direct "descendant" of God's interrelationality.
Trinitarian interrelationality.
The idea of "person" as represented by Christianity is a viable and healthy construct. Any difficulties arising within culture arises from an abrogation, of some sort, of the Christian perspective of what it
means to be a "person."

What does it mean to be a "person?"

The intuitive drive within a human being causes him/her to love themselves. But it is a love that in nature is not totally turned inward. This natural love for self is relational and God reflecting.
Even within the most selfish among us there is still a need for community. We as individuated "persons" are not fulfilled unless our "individuality" is realized against the backdrop of community.This is also reflective of Trinitarian interrelationality as defined in several places in the scripture. This interrelationality, or love, is demonstrated in John 1:18 " No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known." (NIV).
Dynamic interrelationality between the Father and the Son. Distinct individualization, and community.
This is why Christianity is healthy as a truth proposition, because it demands the logical necessity for community without the annulment of individual personalities, regardless of race or gender.
And it derives this definitional power from the doctrine of the Trinity.

But the disappearance of the "person" as manifested in today's ever growing un-civility is an apparent
ignorance of the greatest commandment.

"You shall love the LORD GOD with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength."
In order to love God and then our neighbor we have to have the right God.
(Which means that loving your neighbor is not just an ethical matter but rather a theological one.)
The way we think of God is linked to the way we will think of and treat "persons" and, contrary to popular opinion, Christianity preserves that structure. In fact, for the whole western world, it could be said that Christianity put into place the foundations for western society, including the respect and freedom of "persons." Christianity, when understood as the backbone of culture, energizes and sustains culture. Even science itself is not possible without the foundational stones already laid by Christianity. And, though ironic it is, neither Atheism, Skepticism,or Darwinism is possible without them drinking from the watering troughs of Christianity. All kinds of anti-Christian dogma rob from Christian capital. For without the philosophy that undergirds Christianity, the will and freedom of man is not protected and man's ability to think for himself (no matter how silly those thoughts are) is diminished.

The Secret and the Sacred:

In John 4:16 the apostle states that "God is love." In His very essence or nature His great propensity is towards love. Now this does not negate His justice because He is holy, for He is both a God of love and justice. He is both a God oflove and wrath. He does not change. He is immutable. To use Aristotelian language, He has no potentiality (ability to change) but He is pure actuality (true being, changeless).Since God is love it thus signifies, once again, outwardly relational and interrelational.
The Father loved the Son.
Then in as much as we are image bearers we reflect this quality of God. No one is an island, or no one lives and dies unto himself. We are, like God, relational beings.
The "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness," passage in Genesis 1:26 is a peek into the "genesis" of the "person." It reveals an inner activity within God when forming the inner man or soul.
It is mysterious.
It is to be protected, for it is sacred.
Philosophers for centuries have delved into the mystery of the "person". And although the mystery of the
"person" is a philosophical issue it is ultimately theological. It is a metaphysical question, therefore it
should come as no surprise that gravitating between the idea of God as Trinity and the concept of "persons" is a bridge easily crossed.
As I've said before, what we think about God is easily reflected in our concept of "personhood. "
For instance, if our idea of God is that there is no God then our idea of "personhood" will necessarily be worked out logically from that benchmark, i.e. life becomes purely mechanistic and less mysterious. Ultimately the existence of life, intelligent life, is left without explanation and is inconclusive when the attempt is made to discover what it means to BE.
Instead it is proven, scientifically, that life holds mysteries which we have yet to apprehend.

"0 Lord, you have searched me and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise: You perceive my thoughts from afar. you discern my going out and my lying down: You are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely. "
(Psalms 139: 1-4 NIV)
Contrary to the physicalist, life is more than mechanistic. It is summed up in that part of man that exists in secret.The soul. And we know, though we deny, that someone's paying attention to this conglomeration of cells and DNA.
Then assuming that the "person" is just the result of matter being glued together by skin and sinew reduces the value of the "person" from something mysterious, sacred and God-oriented into a freak of happenstance thrown together in the junkyard of the universe.

But,
"For you created my inmost being: You knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I
am fearfully and wonderfully made: Your works are wonderful. I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths
of the earth, Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be." (Psalms 139: 13-16 NIV)

The idea of "personhood" as we can see comes from somewhere other than ourselves. Also the "person"
extends beyond just the human frame. But today it is that extension, or umbilical chord, that has been cut. No matter how debased man becomes he is still a product of hands he cannot see, thoughts he cannot read, mysteries he cannot understand, love he cannot comprehend, grace he cannot account for, dreams he cannot dream, and a God whose image he bears upon his shoulders, around his neck, in his
navel, in his head, and through his heart.


For God so loved the world that He gave that which He loved. Now that's a high concept of person.

Writer's deluge and ADD

Other than suffering from mental sophistry at times, (which makes the world I create challenging, especially for a sedate personality such as myself...I chide...I bruise my side from the ribbing I receive from...myself) I suffer from an incoherence of thoughts running together, blending, mixing, and causing clumsiness to my five digits. It's hard to convey these mental synapses of brilliance when a fuse needs changing.
For some reason there has been a disconnect between the "genesis" of what I want to say and the "resurrection" of it being said. My thoughts are stuck in the tomb.
Never mind the sophistry comment, I do try to be as consistent and logical as Aristotle...minus the old time greek penchant for males in togas. I actually prefer my women, uh...I mean woman, in full leggings.
When I write, I write an argument based on a conclusions, based on premises without fallacy...or as close to fallacylessness as possible. Unless, of course I'm just being facetious...and if I am, just read, smoke your cigarette, cough up blood, giggle and take an Ambien...it will help explain the meaning.

(And now comes a "however" to the above rambling.)
HOWEVER, I've hit a wall...or more like a flood has hit me. A writer's deluge.

(Funny I mentioned "males in togas" because I'm now having to change the tv channel from "Glee" to the shopping network)

Right now I have eight articles that I've started...and at least one more that I've written the first paragraph in my head. So I've been flooded by thoughts and ideas but...

"Justified" has started on FX..."Lights Out" looks really good..."American Idol" with Steven "I look like Mick Jagger" Tyler, and the hypnotic hindquarters of Jennifer Lopez, is in full swing...the Real Housewives of OC and Miami...so my DVR is full and my mind is scattered.

I do have much to say and many people to anger.
I've intended to write about the Trinity, but Raylan Givens keeps pulling his gun and killing folk.
I've intended to write about  heaven, but..."THIS... is American Idol."
I've intended to write about total depravity, but Tamra and Gretchen are still at each other's throats...showing their depravity along with all the other housewives.
So you see my problem? Even with a DVR, especially with a DVR, I've little time on my hands to do anything that's not frivolous...although my blog is very frivolous, at times. What I mean is that I've little chance to do anything that requires a scintilla of discipline.

All the while the writer's deluge keeps coming, so I should skin this potato and start collating these thoughts.
A feeling of urgency should flood my soul and the creative millimeter of my brain because...             

Big Brother starts in July.