For those who might be tempted to believe the lies spread concerning my doctrine....
God is Relational
God is not a solitary being, closed in upon Himself, nor a detached abstraction, He is relational. This is not a trait He acquired when He created the world, nor a mode of interaction He chose to adopt. It is who He is. Relationship is not a consequence of creation; it is a quality of God's eternal being. God did not become relational. He always has been.
Some have argued that if God is truly perfect and self-sufficient, then relationship must be beneath Him. Why would a perfect being need anything outside Himself? This objection sounds pious but reveals a misunderstanding. It treats relationship as a response to deficiency rather than as an expression of fullness. It assumes that to be relational is to be dependent, that to love is to lack, and that to give is to diminish oneself. This is not Christianity, it’s Platonism. The God of Scripture is not a static perfection removed from relationship, He is a living, personal Being whose nature is so rich and complete that it overflows in communion and love. To say that God is relational is not to weaken Him but to glorify Him. It is not to make Him needy but to reveal Him as the source of all goodness.
This truth becomes clear when we consider that God is Triune. He did not exist as a solitary essence for all eternity. From everlasting to everlasting, God has existed as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. These are not roles He temporarily adopts, but are names that express eternal relationships within the divine being. A father is not a father without a child, nor is a son a son without a father. These terms point beyond metaphor and into the very structure of God's nature. He is not a solitary monad, self-contained and impersonal. He is the living God who speaks, who loves, who gives, and who receives all within His triune self, and in so doing provides a coherent answer to one of the oldest moral questions ever posed....
Is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?
If the former, then goodness is arbitrary. If the latter, then goodness is higher than God. If goodness is defined solely by God's commands, then morality is arbitrary. He could just as easily have declared cruelty to be good and kindness to be evil. Yet if God commands something because it is good, then goodness exists as a standard outside of God, which makes Him subject to something higher than Himself. This is known as Euthyphro’s dilemma, and it has unsettled philosophers since Plato wrote it. The strength of the dilemma lies in its presupposition of a unitarian god; a solitary will that either creates morality by decree or submits to it as an external standard. Many theologies have tried to dodge the trap by appealing to mystery or semantics. Only one answers it directly. Only one shows why goodness, love, and righteousness are neither arbitrary nor external, but eternal. It is the triune nature of the Christian God that breaks this binary. God is not a lone authority, He is an eternal fellowship of three Persons, each bearing witness to the others. Goodness is not a divine assertion; it is a divine relationship. As Jesus said, “If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not credible” (John 5:31). In God, there is not merely one witness to divine goodness, but Three. This avoids the problem of circular self-justification. The Father testifies of the Son, the Son of the Spirit, and the Spirit of the Father, each of the three bearing witness to the righteousness of the others. The standard of goodness is not externally imposed nor arbitrarily created. It is the eternal, relational consistency of God’s own being. Moral truth is not decided or invented, nor is it imposed from outside. It is descriptive of God’s nature. It is eternal because it is rooted in God's character, and His character does not change.
This is not any sort of abstract or esoteric philosophical indulgence; it is a foundational and necessary truth. If God were not relational in Himself, then love would not be essential to His nature. That would undermine not only moral absolutes but also God’s trustworthiness, His relationality, and ultimately, the very foundation of salvation. If God were not triune, He would have had to create in order to love. That would make love contingent rather than essential to His being. But God did not need to create in order to love. He said, “Let Us make man in Our image” (Genesis 1:26). Not in "My image", but in "Our image". Also, God the Son, the Logos of God, “was in the beginning with God” (John 1:2). There was already relationship. There was already love, joy, and fellowship, and there were three divine Witnesses to it all, which is how Christianity resolves the ancient dilemma. Rather than sidestepping it as other religions do, it exposes the false assumption that morality arises from either command or compliance. In the God of the Bible, there is no gap between what is and what ought to be, because relationship itself bridges the divide. God is righteous because He is relational, He is good because He is love, and He is love because He has never been alone.
God is relational. That is why love is possible and why righteousness is real. Relationship is not an add-on to divinity. It is not an appendage, an afterthought, or an accommodation to human weakness. It is the eternal glory of the living God. Everything else flows from this.
(The above was not copy/pasted from some other author. I wrote it myself, this morning.)
No further questions. Keep doing what you are doing and you’ll keep getting what you are getting. Hundreds of threads with zero replies. People who join, but don’t post, and people who post a few times until they lose interest or you run them off.