Second Person of the Trinity as Image of the Father

[Neil_Anthony]

I have a question about this statement:

"The Second Person of the Trinity is the Personal Expression of the Father’s eternal Self-Concept"

If a perfect self-image of a perfect being (like God the Father) necessarily must exist as a person, then what about the other self-images within the trinity. For example, wouldn’t the Son have an image of himself which would necessarily be perfect, and therefore a fourth person of the trinity?

 

[JimG]

I think the answer to the question is essentially unknowable to the human intellect. I recall the same question coming up in a college theology class. The second person is the full expression of the father’s knowledge. He knows himself perfectly, so there is nothing in the original which is lacking in the generated knowledge, including personhood.

The third person is the fullest expression of the love between father and son.

One could argue that each of the persons would similaraly generate other persons through the action of their intellect and will.

But it must be kept in mind that God has only one intellect and one will. Each person of the trinity acts with the one divine nature, including the one intellect and the one will.

So I suspect that the answer lies in the direction that God, in the expression of his one intellect and one will, has fully expressed himself in three persons, and no futher generation is needed or required or possible, as it would seem to indicate some lack in the first expression.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Thank you, that’s very helpful!

Now I’m wondering if this means that any Supreme Being that we can conceive is necessarily trinitarian? For example, is it even possible to conceive of the Hebrew or Islamic God in a way that does not include that God’s ‘self-concept’ that is begotten as a second person?

 

[rwoehmke]

Thank you, that’s very helpful!
Now I’m wondering if this means that any Supreme Being that we can conceive is necessarily trinitarian? For example, is it even possible to conceive of the Hebrew or Islamic God in a way that does not include that God’s ‘self-concept’ that is begotten as a second person?

The God of the Muslims and Jews is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is also the Christian God. Thing is the Muslims and Jews have a more limited image or concept of God than does a Christian. Three religions, three persons, one God.

 

[JimG]

Now I’m wondering if this means that any Supreme Being that we can conceive is necessarily trinitarian?

Since God is trinitarian, I think that we can say that God is necessarily Trinitarian. God is also necessarily one.

But as far as what we can conceive of–it is certainly not likely that we would be aware of the Trinitarian nature of God except through divine revelation. While the concept can make sense to me philosophically, after having been revealed through Jesus, it’s not something I would ever have believed if not for divine revelation.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

The God of the Muslims and Jews is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is also the Christian God. Thing is the Muslims and Jews have a more limited image or concept of God than does a Christian. Three religions, three persons, one God.

Very true. If I may rephrase the question:

Are the Hebrew and Islamic understandings of a supreme being who is not a trinity coherent? Is this argument that the son is the logical consequence of the Father’s self-conception actually a proof that any conceived supreme being must necessarily be triune?

 

[Hastrman]

Very true. If I may rephrase the question:

Are the Hebrew and Islamic understandings of a supreme being who is not a trinity coherent? Is this argument that the son is the logical consequence of the Father’s self-conception actually a proof that any conceived supreme being must necessarily be triune?

Coherent, just incomplete–like Newtonian physics.

 

[jean8]

I have a question about this statement:

"The Second Person of the Trinity is the Personal Expression of the Father’s eternal Self-Concept"

If a perfect self-image of a perfect being (like God the Father) necessarily must exist as a person, then what about the other self-images within the trinity. For example, wouldn’t the Son have an image of himself which would necessarily be perfect, and therefore a fourth person of the trinity?

Neil,
When discussing the Trinity, this can be puzzling as you may know.
Jn.1:1 reads “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, 2. he was with God in the beginning.” 14. “the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, we have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
verse 18 “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only , who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” (Incarnation)
Col.1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation”
One God, The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit."

God bless,
jean8

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Neil,
When discussing the Trinity, this can be puzzling as you may know.
Jn.1:1 reads “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, 2. he was with God in the beginning.” 14. “the Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us, we have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.”
verse 18 “No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only , who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.” (Incarnation)
Col.1:15 “He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation”
One God, The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit."

God bless,
jean8

Thank you Jean.
I noticed in your profile and your other posts that perhaps you’re a protestant who subscribes to “sola scriptura”. So I want to take this opportunity to make a little plug for “more than scriptura”
I think you showed me all the best verses from the bible to answer my question. And yet, it doesn’t really answer the question! Did you notice that? So do you see how sometimes there is value to studying things that are based on scripture, but go beyond it?
Sincerely,
Neil