Is this what you think of when you think of the Trinity? Essentially an original master (Father) with two carbon copies of himself, (Son and Spirit) that are just subordinate in authority and different in function to him? Is there anything deficient in this view? Ponder a while, maybe even leave a comment. I'm still thinking about it, but will log my thoughts at a later date.
2 comments:
Thats interesting...
'carbon copies' not in the sense that God the Father is a middle eastern carpenter, but in a Hebrews 1:3 sense then sure. Jesus is the image of the glory of God, the 'express image of His person'
In 'The end for which God created the world' Edwards says that Jesus is the Father's understanding of Himself reflected back to Him, and the Spirit was the love He had for that reflection. Now i'm not totally on board with that, especially for where it leaves the personhood of the Holy Spirit, but it's hard to disagree with the greatest theologian ever.
Authority and subordination: Yeh, as far as it goes. The Father begat the Son, the Father sent the Son, the Son can do nothing without the Father. This is one of the pillars of my understanding of monotheistic trinitarianism. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, the Son sends the Spirit, the Holy Spirit points people to the Son, or, maybe better, the Father's glory in the Son.
Looking forward to your thoughts man...
Edwards was brilliant in getting my thinking going on all this Trinity business, and his definition is a helpful paradigm, but like you say, the Son as a mere projection/reflection of the Father falls short when held up to scrutiny (in my humble - not the greatest theologian ever- opinion!)
Have posted my thoughts this evening in fact. Enjoy!
Post a Comment