I was walking to our pool tonight and started thinking. Ah. But what to think about? Well, I’m walking, so why not think about actions? Now this is still an idea I’m chewing on, but I’d like to go on and get a lot of it out here. Perchance more will come to me as I continue to write my blog.
There are different types of actions. I think of walking first off. I walk to the pool. Where, the pool does not receive the action of my walking. I do. I am the one acting and in an odd way, the object of my walking. My goal of course, is the pool, but it is all happening to me. Now maybe some English majors might want to correct me and if so, very well.
Some have an object in their very nature and can only apply to the one doing the action. I think about the saying “I sleep.” I can put an adverb to that action of sleeping. I sleep soundly. However, if I am the one doing it, I can be the only one receive the action. I do not need to describe another object.
Some are automatic in their object. I think of words like hallucinate and dream. I do not hallucinate what is real. If it is really there, then it is not a hallucination. I can see a hallucination and it seems real, but I cannot hallucinate something that is really there before me. I cannot dream anything other than a dream either. (And I mean dream in the sense of what one does when asleep and not have a deep desire.)
Then I thought about words like love and hate and desire. They automatically imply an object. If I say, “I love” that is rather incomplete. Love automatically has an object that is receiving the action. Hate and desire is the same way. There is something receiving the action. The same goes for thinking.
I got to thinking about God’s thoughts then. My view is that God gets no new thoughts. God knows all that can possibly be known for all time. New ideas do not enter the mind of God. That would kind of go against omniscience. God is the eternal knower and he knows all truths eternally.
Now let’s imagine that God thinks about the highest thing he can think about. Well that would be himself. Let us suppose that he thought of himself. Could God have a perfect thought of himself? Of course! That would mean though that God is incapable of thinking a less than perfect thought of himself.
Could he have a thought of himself that’s as real as he is? Yes. For if he couldn’t, then God is limited in his thinking and his viewing of himself. God would not be able to even know himself. If God could not know himself, then there would be knowledge outside of God and if knowledge resides in a mind, we must know where this knowledge is.
So God eternally has this thought of himself and this thought cannot be less than himself. That would mean that the thought would have to be an exact representation of himself. However, for the thought to be an exact representation of himself, it would have to eternally exist an eternally exist in reality.
With that, we can say we have the Son. The exact representation of the Father in reality.
Now someone is saying “Alright, then why aren’t there 1,000 Sons? Why just one? The answer is simple. If this is an exact representation, then what difference would there be in another one? They would all have the same properties of being the eternal thought of God and would not differ then. If there is no difference, then they are the same. We avoid Unitarianism because God is thinking and that thinking is producing something. There is the thinker and then the thought.
Now these two eternally exist. There is a deep love then that is just as real. It is so real it is personal, for how could love between the two persons be less than personal? With that, we could say we have the Holy Spirit. In essence, the Son eternally reflects the Father and the Holy Spirit is the love between them.
Thus, God is capable of knowing for each person knows things other than themselves. They know each other. Could this be also how we are capable of knowing things other than ourselves? We can know other because each person of the Trinity can know other? Were Unitarianism true, we might be capable of only receiving actions directed to ourselves.
Now this is all just thinking out loud at this point and I want to do some more pondering on this line of thought, but I think it has some merit. I hope the reader thinks such as well.
Support Deeper Waters on Patreon!
