{"id":2246,"date":"2010-07-25T17:33:51","date_gmt":"2010-07-25T21:33:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/?p=2246"},"modified":"2013-11-23T21:52:00","modified_gmt":"2013-11-24T02:52:00","slug":"is-god-a-self-part-1-dale","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/trinities.org\/blog\/is-god-a-self-part-1-dale\/","title":{"rendered":"Is God a self? Part 1"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"Many of you know that I’ve argued in several ways, in print<\/a>, against “social” Trinity theories<\/strong>, and particularly the sort which holds that Father, Son, and Spirit are a group\/community\/quasi-family.<\/p>\n

On such theories, it turns out that the one “God” is a group<\/strong> – a group of equally divine selves (aka gods – though they don’t like that term in the plural). This is surprising to be sure <\/strong>– is not the God of the Bible a super-duper self? One who is all-knowing, who loves and hates, carries out plans of action, smites and heals? Moreover, theism<\/strong> is usually explained as belief in one perfect, non-physical self, creator off all else.<\/p>\n

Social trinitarians have of late been pushing back<\/strong>. “God isn’t one person, he’s three! We Christians<\/em> have never said – or at least, never should have said – that God is a person. He’s not a person, though he’s personal<\/em>. And that makes our view monotheistic.”<\/p>\n

(A similar dialectic occurs with “social” theorists who don’t say that Father, Son, and Spirit are a mere group. Instead, they constitute or are within some one thing – but<\/em> this thing is not a self.)<\/p>\n

Now I think this response is wrongheaded<\/strong> in several ways, and am working on at least one paper responding to it.<\/p>\n

But for now I note that a number of these “social” theorists are evangelicals, and thus many of them tend to take positions in other areas which push in the opposite direction.<\/p>\n