Let me put it another way. (And I think I can actually be brief on this one.)
Justyn wants to argue about what is the right way to understand the Trinity. The few times I have taken him on, it was not to disprove anything he believes, but to suggest that holding it the way he does is not really important. If the desire of looking at it is to show that it is even more robust and therefore impossible to reconcile in full, then I have little problem.
I'm convinced that the only importance in the various aspects of God that are revealed is that God is what those revelations say that he is. And each one is real and meaningful. But trying to stick two or more of them together to create an unrevealed truth by induction is fantasy. It could be true, but it is not revealed. We like the term "enjoy." Enjoy what is revealed. Taking it further is a little like arguing angels and pinheads (or is it pinheads and patriots?
). It is beyond what is written and is, at best, speculation.
And even though these particular views espoused by Edwards, Lewis, and Piper are softer toward the kind of sameness of person that Lee sometimes spoke of, Lee clearly made gross errors in some of his use of scripture to support his positions. Doesn't make him a heretic. Just wrong. (And aren't we all on some things.)