[Kolokotronis]

""Essence" speaks of the Godhead. In the unity of the Godhead there are 3 persons (hypostases, if you will.) These three persons are Father, Son, and Holy Spirit."

Part of the problem is in using the word "person" for hypostasis; that's not what it means and its always a mistake to attribute human characteristics to God.

Try looking at "Against the Arians" by +Athanasius the Great. It is a marvelous work on the Son in relation to the Father and the Trinity. It is thoroughly "orthodox" and in sync with the Creed. Its very long, but there is a pretty good paper on it presented at a Baptist seminary which you both might find interesting (pdf format):

http://www.templebaptistseminary.edu/alumni/jones.pdf.

[Mad Dawg]

I have always wondered at the choice of "person" - but then the west was translating "ousia" as "substantia" - when "essentia" seems to me to have been the better choice, but what do I know? But Substantia literally translated hypostatis, or at least that's how the words look to me.

I am told that "persona' originally meant "mask" - as in an actor's mask. I'm not sure if that helps, but it strikes me as encouraging a kind of modalist monarchianism. But it's not strictly and archaically speaking a "human" type attribute.

Out here is where I usually begin to get dizzy.