Greetings and all the best from China … 
I am delighted to find this forum... and the previous post above mine has written with keen acuity concerning this issue as well.
Not only has this issue been involved in heated discussion throughout entire Church History ... during those 300+ years after the ascension ... there were also anathemas thrown everywhere ... and many persons smeared with being a "heretic" too
Although commonly understood and publicly known ... it seems that anathemas and being labeled as a "heretic" is acceptable and necessary to "defend" the "Faith" in the posts that I have read thus far I even observed there was a
text shown to suggest this very situation.
After reading the exceptionally satisfying posts concerning Universalism Restoration ( which in my personal view would include ultimate Reconciliation which comes from my own Trinitarian perspective ; )
I observed that Gregory of Nyssa was mentioned in support of this view .. Along with Basil and the other Cappadocian Father I am curious as to why these Theologians were not mentioned in support of their view of the Trinity.
As to my personal view -- it took me more than two decades of personal introspective study in order to finally
achieve my goal of being able to resolve this issue conceptually so that I could be satisfied in my quest to
comprehend how 3 can be Unity and how Unity can be expressed with diversity.
The Cappadocian Fathers along with other Eastern Orthodox Thelogians as well as others aided me in this quest.
While reading the very early edition of one of the best selling books "The Shack" written by Paul (William) Young
who is a really close personal friend ... He was criticized strongly and aggressively by utilizing his creative imagination
to present the Trinitarian members ( *members* being used since I am using English along with the same predictament as
the early Church Fathers tangled with in attempting to use a written language to illustrate a very dynamic profound concept while avoiding at the same time any static presentation of codified dogma or doctrine)
Paul used three "persons" -- God the Father was presented as a hearty Oprah Winfrey (my imaginative reading was that she was rather hefty too.. ; ) Jesus was presented as a Carpenter and the Holy Spirit was presented as a Chinese female...
or 'spirit' Due to my personally close friendship with Paul I made some suggestions along with lots of encouraging remarks with humor but continued to express my theological views as well -- the book had at that time a profound emotional experience in my life in several ways .. thus I heartily recommend anyone to read it .. which by the way my own non religious non christian typical consumeristic parents called me up one day and told me to read it and sent me a copy .. ; )
In another post in this forum I mentioned my personal view ( personal -- meaning it is mine and I hold it with as much passion as others do with theirs -- in fact, due to my theological view of the Trinity it has greatly shaped and formed my Egalitarian view of the Church .. the Kingdom of God ... and how I interpret Genesis 1-3 in a creative fashion -- along with deeply influencing my daily social behavior towards others )
My view is -- the ontological essence of the Trinity belongs to, flows from, embedded within, dynamically bonding via the perichoretic koinonia between the Trinitarian fellowship ...
the father is not the son ... nor the son the father .. nor is the Spirit either one ...
the Spirit did not flow from the Father ... nor flow from the Father and Son ...
the Son was not "created" or "begotten" in the way that several brilliant posters have mentioned above...
from Eternity there has been an Egalitarian fellowship (eternity meaning that there was never any moment..
time .. eon... kairos or chronos ... when there was Only ... One God.. which is always mentioned as The Father...
There is Only One God ... but this Unity is expressed via the perichoresis to be found in the diversity of
the *members* of the Trinity ... thus one might use " A Grand Dance" involving all 3
The Cappadican Fathers utilized this perspective to illustrate it ... as well
In my opinion the unfortunate and huge dilemna facing those in Early Church History was the
personal autonomous behavior seeking to gain more "authoritative clout" and power... both ecceliastically
as well as politically throughout the known Church during those times...
If one wishes to reduce Einstein's theories or other theories of physics which deal with black holes
or white holes and their locations or their proposed essential purpose for Galaxies ...
to simplistic logic or even mathematical formulas .. in order to assert a dominate "power" or management
or worse a control to influence others ... then written language becomes tangled in an endless "web"
in its attempt to seek to have these theories codified with such static so called "clarity"
could anyone here in this forum seek to translate Tang Dynasty poems into well written English ?
although there are probably English translations of such .. immediately the profound beauty of "Art"
vanishes as the Chinese characters flutter away along with the harsh sound of resounding thunder in the distance..
Art is exceptionally important in attempting to communicate some concepts ...
This is the reason I spend time along with my Passion to visit places with Natural scenery or Museums...
May the rich bountiful blessings from the perorchetic koinonia from the Trinitarian fellowship
envelop all of you throughout each day until we meet again at the Eschatological Grand Dance ...
the consummation of all things known and unknown...
all the best
Now there’s an exercise in intellectual gymnastics if I ever saw one. And actually, in contemplation of the tortured sentence, it’s not bad - rooted in the rumination of the church fathers as it is.
(why are these theological words so hard to spell.)
