[Cal]

That classic approach to the Godhead always ends in a conundrum.

If you try to see it as three persons who are somehow one person it doesn't make sense.

If you try to see it as three persons you get three gods.

If you try to see it as one person who plays different roles you get modalism.

I'm not satisfied with that classic approach because it leaves so many questions unanswered. Such as:

How can each be distinct, but also each be the whole God?

How can the three be one and the one be three?

Why is the Father's and Son's relationship with the Spirit so different than their relationship with each other? Why do we hear about their love for each other but not of their love for the Spirit?

If we are in God's image and God is triune, how are we triune like he is?


But the Edwards/Piper approach seems to answer nicely these questions.

For a perfect being, his self and self-image would each be perfect and complete. And the relationship between the two would be also. Each would be the whole him in its own way, yet each would be distinct. Each would co-exist and co-inhere from eternity to eternity.

It also shows how the Father and Son can be the same, yet different. The self and self-image of God are really the same thing, yet they are not. Also, in God the relationship between the two is the same as both, yet distinct. Each are God, the whole God, yet each are different.

And in our own imperfect and shadowy way, we can see how we are in the image of this triune being.

I believe, ultimately, that "finding our soul" will be when we come to have the kind of healthy relationship with ourselves that God has with himself. Of course, this will only come by the grace of God.

I think the way of looking at it fits too well for there to be nothing to it. But, again, it's just a theory, not a matter for contention.