[Buggman]

The original word, personna, meant a role rather than an independent being--i.e., there is One God eternally revealed in three distinct roles--but I like the way you separate the concept of self-distinction from the concept of Being. Certainly, there is personification in the Three Roles, with conversation back-and-forth.

My primary problem with the casual use of the word "Persons" is that it gives the distinct impression of three independent beings standing around having a conversation. The concept of the Son and Spirit being subsumed in the Father is lost, and tri-theism all-too-quickly rears its ugly head.

I really don't think we have a substantial disagreement here--just different preferences in the way we're phrasing it.

Shalom.

[xzins]

The concept of self-distinction means that the differentiation of identity belongs to the one being discussed. Therefore, the 1/2/3 persons of the Trinity each know their own self-distinction. I am not in charge of that. At the same time, it gets me in touch with the reality that there IS a self-distinction. The Unity has a self-distinction as well, which is how the 2d person subjects to the 1st person in 1 Co 15:

24then -- the end, when he may deliver up the reign to God, even the Father, when he may have made useless all rule, and all authority and power -- 25for it behoveth him to reign till he may have put all the enemies under his feet -- 26the last enemy is done away -- death; 27for all things He did put under his feet, and, when one may say that all things have been subjected, [it is] evident that He is excepted who did subject the all things to him, 28and when the all things may be subjected to him, then the Son also himself shall be subject to Him, who did subject to him the all things, that God may be the all in all.

My understanding is that Christ subjects Himself to God, and that the person of the Father is a primacy in understanding the tri-unity.