One in substance (2)

Again, which should a trinitarian reject?

God is triune
The Father is not triune
The Father is not God.

“God” is a name for a nature that easily slips into being the name of an individual, just like “mom” (any woman who has had a child) easily becomes “Mom” (a quasi-proper name you use for the woman who gave birth to you).

When we say “God is triune”, however, we are not using the term as either the nature nor the individual. Something is “triune” in this sense when it is one substance or nature in three individuals, or (to use the same capitalization mechanics for “mom”) when it is one god (sort of thing) in three Gods (names for individuals). Trinity is not a nature nor individual, and so when we say God is triune we have to specify that this is God in a third sense other than “god” (the sort of thing) or “God” (the individual). We might call “Trinity” a logical nature, i.e. a label for a doctrine about the subsistence of a single absolute divine esse giving rise to four relations and three persons.

So the aporetic argument is, in fact, right: the Father is not God in the sense that “God” is used in the major premise. Trinitarians don’t think that the Father is God in the sense of being neither an individual nor nature, or that Father is God in the sense of being a label for a doctrine about God.

%d bloggers like this: