Is Divine Simplicity Biblical?

Questions #0: Is Divine Simplicity Biblical? And Trinity & Simplicity together, really?

Introduction

This overview is designed to answer one crucial question: Is divine simplicity biblical? In response, it draws together key Old Testament passages–beginning with foundational texts in Exodus and Deuteronomy, and extending through the Prophets and later writings–to demonstrate that God is depicted as entirely unique, unchangeable, and without composition. By layering earlier biblical material (e.g., Exodus 3:14, Deuteronomy 6:4) with subsequent echoes in the Prophets (Isaiah, Malachi) and reflective literature (Job, Psalms), the survey uncovers a continuous thread woven throughout the Old Testament.

In doing so, this text shows how each passage either lays a foundational statement (“God is one and unchangeable”) or echoes that statement in a referential way (“there is none like Him”). Every quotation is placed in context, highlighting both the earliest proclamations of God’s absolute oneness and the later reaffirmations of the same truth. From the burning bush (“I AM WHO I AM”) to the post-exilic reminder that “I the LORD do not change,” the Old Testament consistently presents a God who cannot be subdivided or conditioned by anything outside Himself.

Taken together, these layered testimonies illustrate that divine simplicity is not merely a later doctrinal construct, but rather a scriptural teaching rooted in the very fabric of Israel’s revelation. The end result is a clear, biblical portrait: there is but one God, fully self-existent, dependent on nothing, and unalterable in His nature–a testament to divine simplicity that spans the entire Old Testament corpus.

The Survey

With the introduction out of the way I can now survey the Old Testament and demonstrate how it is in fact biblical. So, below I draw together the Old Testament’s witness to God’s divine simplicity, highlighting how certain references are “foundational” (establishing core attributes) while others are “referential” (echoing or reinforcing those foundational ideas). Wherever possible, the text includes direct quotations from Scripture to maximize the biblical witness. You will see how these verses build upon one another in a layered tradition–from earlier books (like Exodus and Deuteronomy) through later writings (such as the Prophets and Malachi). In this way, divine simplicity emerges as a continuous thread woven throughout the Old Testament.

1. Foundational Old Testament Witness

Exodus 3:14

“God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.’ And he said, ‘Say this to the people of Israel: “I AM has sent me to you.”‘”

Why It’s Foundational:

Often regarded as the bedrock of biblical theology, Exodus 3:14 underscores God’s self-existence and unchangeable being. By revealing Himself simply as “I AM,” God identifies His essence with His existence–nothing about Him is derived, composite, or dependent on anything else. This verse echoes the earlier creation account in Genesis 1:1 (“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth”), showing God as the sole, eternal Source of all that is.

Deuteronomy 4:35

“To you it was shown, that you might know that the LORD is God; there is no other besides him.”

Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema)

“Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one.”

Deuteronomy 32:39

“See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.”

Why These Are Foundational:

Deuteronomy repeatedly hammers home the uniqueness and oneness of God. Deuteronomy 6:4 (the Shema) is the quintessential confession of Israel’s faith: “The LORD is one.” It encapsulates divine simplicity by insisting that God is not one among many but the only One–He cannot be partitioned, replicated, or reduced.

1 Samuel 2:2

“There is none holy like the LORD; there is none besides you; there is no rock like our God.”

Job 23:13

“But he is unchangeable, and who can turn him back? What he desires, that he does.”

Isaiah 43:10

“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me.”

Isaiah 44:6

“Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: ‘I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.'”

Isaiah 45:5–6

“I am the LORD, and there is no other; besides me there is no God. … that people may know, from the rising of the sun and from the west, that there is none besides me; I am the LORD, and there is no other.”

Isaiah 46:9

“Remember the former things of old; for I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me.”

Malachi 3:6

“For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.”

Why They’re Foundational:

From the historical books (1 Samuel) to the Wisdom tradition (Job) and onward to the Prophets (Isaiah and Malachi), these passages underscore God’s incomparable, unchangeable nature. Malachi, likely among the last Old Testament books written, reaffirms what Exodus first established–God does not change (Malachi 3:6). This continuity shows that divine simplicity is not a late invention but a doctrine embedded from the earliest to the latest Old Testament writings.

2. Referential (Echoing) Old Testament Witness

2 Kings 19:19

“So now, O LORD our God, save us, please, from his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you, O LORD, are God alone.”

1 Chronicles 17:20

“There is none like you, O LORD, and there is no God besides you, according to all that we have heard with our ears.”

Psalm 18:31

“For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God?”

Psalm 86:10

“For you are great and do wondrous things; you alone are God.”

Psalm 102:27

“But you are the same, and your years have no end.”

Psalm 115:3

“Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases.”

Psalm 135:6

“Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps.”

Isaiah 40:18

“To whom then will you liken God, or what likeness compare with him?”

Why They’re Referential:

These texts echo the foundational statements from Exodus and Deuteronomy. Psalm 18:31, Psalm 86:10, and 1 Chronicles 17:20 repeat the theme that there is none like God. 2 Kings 19:19 essentially prays the same truth: deliver us so that the world knows “you, O LORD, are God alone.” When the psalmist proclaims, “you alone are God,” it is a poetic reiteration of “the LORD is one,” consolidating the theme of God’s utter uniqueness and simplicity.

3. Additional Texts That Reinforce or Echo Older Traditions

Below are extra references showing how divine simplicity is threaded through other Old Testament books, sometimes explicitly quoting or alluding to older texts.

1. Numbers 23:19

“God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind.”

• Echoes 1 Samuel 15:29 and Malachi 3:6 on God’s immutability.

2. Jeremiah 10:10

“But the LORD is the true God; he is the living God and the everlasting King.”

• Reinforces Deuteronomy 4:35 and Isaiah 43:10 about God’s unique and eternal reign.

3. Hosea 11:9

“I am God and not a man, the Holy One in your midst, and I will not come in wrath.”

• Echoes Numbers 23:19 and Malachi 3:6, emphasizing God’s unchanging nature.

4. Zechariah 14:9

“And the LORD will be king over all the earth. On that day the LORD will be one and his name one.”

• Echoes the Shema (Deuteronomy 6:4) and Isaiah 45:5–6, proclaiming God’s exclusive oneness.

5. Psalm 33:11

“The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations.”

• Resonates with Psalm 102:27 (“you are the same”) and Isaiah 46:10, highlighting God’s immutable counsel.

4. Oldest and Newest Layered Echoes of Divine Simplicity

Oldest Layer (Exodus 3:14)

“God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM.'”

This self-revelation sets the tone for the entire Old Testament. God’s statement of pure being–“I AM”–cannot be subdivided or altered. It resonates with Genesis 1:1 (“In the beginning, God created…”), presenting God as the eternal Author of life.

Newest Layer (Malachi 3:6)

“For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.”

Malachi, one of the last prophets, explicitly reaffirms that the God revealed at the burning bush (Exodus) is the same God of the post-exilic community. By declaring, “I the LORD do not change,” Malachi connects back to the earliest testimony of Scripture, showing that divine simplicity spans the entire Old Testament corpus.

5. Case Studies in Contextual Echoing

A. The Book of Isaiah

1. Isaiah 44:6

“Thus says the LORD, … ‘I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god.'”

• Directly echoes Exodus 3:14 and Deuteronomy 32:39, presenting God as the only true God.

2. Isaiah 46:9

“I am God, and there is none like me.”

• Reiterates Deuteronomy 4:35 and sets the tone for God’s absolute uniqueness.

3. Isaiah 43:10–11

“Before me no god was formed, nor shall there be any after me. I, I am the LORD, and besides me there is no savior.”

• Folds in themes from Exodus, Deuteronomy, and even earlier patriarchal covenants (Genesis 17:1).

B. The Book of Malachi

1. Malachi 1:11

“For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations … for my name will be great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.”

• Shows God’s global supremacy and universal honor, an outworking of His simple, sovereign nature.

2. Malachi 3:1

“Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. …”

• Highlights God’s singular plan of covenant faithfulness, echoing Exodus 20:2 (God as Redeemer and Deliverer) and Isaiah 40:3 (preparing the way of the LORD).

3. Malachi 3:6

“For I the LORD do not change…”

• Ties everything back to the earliest statements of God’s immutable, self-existent being.

Conclusion

This survey demonstrates that the Old Testament consistently witnesses to divine simplicity through a layered tradition, where earlier foundational texts are echoed and reaffirmed in later, historically newer writings. Foundational passages like Exodus 3:14 and Deuteronomy 6:4 establish the core attributes of God–His self-existence, unchangeability, and oneness–forming the bedrock of Israel’s understanding of God. These early declarations provide the conceptual grammar for all subsequent texts, shaping how later authors articulate God’s nature.

Chronologically later texts, such as those in Isaiah, Malachi, and the Psalms, draw directly from this foundation, echoing and applying its truths to new historical and theological contexts. For example, Isaiah reasserts God’s exclusive oneness and unchangeability in the face of idolatry, while Malachi reaffirms these same truths to a post-exilic audience. These later writings do not innovate but instead conserve and amplify the foundational revelation, showing its timeless relevance and continuity throughout Israel’s history.

Through this interplay, the survey reveals a unified and cohesive biblical witness: God is one, unchanging, and without composition. From the earliest revelations at the burning bush to the reaffirmations in Israel’s prophetic and liturgical traditions, the Old Testament consistently upholds divine simplicity as an essential attribute of the God of Israel. This enduring thread underscores that divine simplicity is not a later theological construct but a doctrine embedded in Scripture from beginning to end.

Because divine simplicity insists that God is not composed of parts, dependent on anything external, or subject to alteration, these verses–from the earliest (e.g., Exodus, Deuteronomy) to the latest (e.g., Malachi)–demonstrate a thoroughly unified message. As a result, anyone studying the Old Testament’s depiction of God’s nature can see a clear through-line: God is one, God alone is God, and He does not change. Such is the scriptural bedrock for the classic Christian doctrine of divine simplicity.

The Old Testament in the New

The New Testament consistently echoes and builds upon the Old Testament’s foundational witness, leveraging the Hebrew and Greek biblical witness as a grammar for its own wording and theology. For example, the Old Testament for the New includes the Septuagint rendering of the Shema (“Ἄκουε Ἰσραήλ, Κύριος ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, Κύριος εἷς ἐστιν”), rather than replacing or contradicting it. Another example here is when Jesus declares, “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58), He directly echoes Exodus 3:14, identifying Himself with the self-existent God of Israel. Likewise, Paul in 1 Corinthians 8:6 deliberately mirrors the Shema’s “εἷς Θεός” (one God) and adds “εἷς Κύριος” (one Lord) for Christ–“ἀλλ’ ἡμῖν εἷς Θεὸς ὁ Πατήρ… καὶ εἷς Κύριος Ἰησοῦς Χριστός”–thus incorporating Jesus into Israel’s monotheistic confession. This continuity shows that the New Testament writers draw on the same theological tradition while reinterpreting it in the light of Christ, echoing, fulfilling, and applying the Old Testament’s timeless truths of divine simplicity and oneness to the context of the Gospel.

“Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” -The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version (https://ref.ly/res/LLS:1.0.50/2023-03-10T19:56:15Z/4453722?len=253) (Mt 28:19–20). (1989). Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Next up is a set of definitions that will support an argument showing how exactly one can harmonize the Trinity and & Simplicity. It’s always been aa the Athanasian Creed says, “So in everything, as was said earlier, we must worship their trinity in their unity and their unity in their trinity. Anyone then who desires to be saved should think thus about the trinity.”

Definitions before the argument for Simplicity & Trinity together:

Below is an alphabetical list of key theological/philosophical “jargon” (technical terms) used or referenced in the argument, each followed by a concise definition from a deeply informed Catholic perspective.

Absolute Simplicity

Refers to God’s nature as lacking any composition or partition. In classical Catholic theology, God’s essence (what He is) and existence (that He is) are identical, so He cannot be “divided” into parts (physical or metaphysical).

Act of Begetting / Being Begotten / Procession

In Trinitarian theology, the Father “begets” the Son, the Son is “begotten,” and the Spirit “proceeds.” These are eternal, non-temporal acts that constitute real distinctions among the Persons without implying division or change in God’s essence.

Actus Purus (“Pure Act”)

A Thomistic term indicating that God is fully actualized with no unrealized potential. There is no succession or composition in God; He is purely and eternally being (no “becoming”).

Benovsky’s Approach / Benovsky’s Metaphysical Primitives

Philosopher Jiri Benovsky argues that metaphysical “primitives” should be chosen to solve conceptual problems most effectively. In this context, relational modes serve as primitives that explain real Trinitarian distinctions without introducing composition.

Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)

The official, systematic compendium of Catholic doctrine. It addresses faith, morals, sacraments, and prayer, synthesizing Scripture, Church Tradition, and magisterial teachings.

Compositional Complexity

Any scenario suggesting that God has “parts” or “properties” that could add up to “make” Him. Catholic theology rejects this in God, since it would violate divine simplicity.

Consubstantial

Literally, “of one and the same substance.” Used in the Nicene Creed to assert that the Son (and the Spirit) share fully in the one divine nature with the Father.

Denzinger

Often called the Enchiridion Symbolorum, it is a standard reference work compiling key creeds, definitions, and declarations of the Church’s Magisterium, especially those that clarify Catholic doctrine.

Distinct Divine Persons

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each fully God and yet not each other, forming true distinctions in the Godhead. This is dogmatic in the Catholic tradition and guarded against modalism or tritheism.

Dogmatic Definitions

Formal statements or pronouncements from Ecumenical Councils or the Papal Magisterium that clarify Catholic teaching definitively, such as the Council of Nicaea (325) or Lateran IV (1215).

Essence

What a being is. In God, “what He is” (essence) and “that He is” (existence) coincide perfectly, making Him simple (no composition).

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

The three Persons within the one God. The Father is “unbegotten,” the Son is eternally “begotten of the Father,” the Holy Spirit eternally “proceeds” from the Father (and, in Western theology, from the Father and the Son).

Freedom

God’s freedom is the completely uncoerced, self-determined manner in which He is and acts as God. This spontaneity signifies that His creative decisions flow from nothing but His own, perfect, and sovereign will (to accomplish)–unconstrained by any need or force beyond Himself.

When theologians speak of God’s act of creation as “purely free,” they mean that His choice to create arises from no deficiency, no need, and no external or internal compulsion. In other words, God’s will is not driven by anything outside Himself (no force, no lack, no necessity), nor is there any “part” within God that must be fulfilled. Since God is utterly self-sufficient (He already possesses all goodness and perfection in Himself), He gains nothing by creating. Thus, if He does choose to create, this decision cannot be explained by a shortcoming to be remedied or an external force imposing its will upon Him.

Hence, “purely free” underscores that God’s willing is entirely uncoerced and spontaneous, emerging solely from His own infinite fullness. Unlike human freedom, where we often weigh options out of need or limiting factors, God’s freedom is boundless in that no condition–either within or outside of Him–pressures His choice. Because He is Actus Purus, there is no transition from “not doing” to “doing” inside God; His will is an eternal, unchanging expression of this freedom. Precisely because nothing either adds or subtracts from His perfect being, His decision to create reflects pure generosity rather than any drive to “complete” Himself. This is the heart of describing God’s creative act as “purely free.”

Generation and Procession

Technical terms describing how the Son is from the Father (generation) and how the Spirit is from the Father (and the Son) in the Trinity (procession). They denote eternal relations, not temporal events.

Hypostases / Personae

Greek/Latin terms for the distinct Persons of the Trinity. A hypostasis or persona indicates a unique “who” possessing the same one divine essence.

Metaphysical Primitives

Basic, irreducible explanatory building blocks. By positing “relational modes” as primitives, we account for real distinctions among the divine Persons without composing or adding parts to God.

Modalism

A heretical view that Father, Son, and Spirit are merely different “modes” or “roles” of one Person. Catholic doctrine rejects modalism, insisting on three truly distinct Persons.

Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed

The profession of faith formulated at the Council of Nicaea (325) and expanded at the Council of Constantinople (381). It solemnly teaches that the Son is “begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father,” among other core Trinitarian doctrines.

Premise

A statement used in a logical argument from which a conclusion is drawn. In this context, the argument has premises addressing God’s simplicity, the Trinity of Persons, and how relational modes solve apparent tensions.

Problem-Solvers (in Metaphysics)

A term inspired by Benovsky, referring to metaphysical primitives or concepts introduced specifically to resolve conceptual dilemmas–here, the dilemma of reconciling simplicity with real distinctions.

Processions (Two Processions)

Refers to the Son’s generation from the Father and the Spirit’s procession from the Father (and the Son). Tradition holds there are exactly two such internal processions in God, distinguishing the Three Persons.

Real Distinctions

Catholic Trinitarian doctrine holds the Father, Son, and Spirit are truly distinct “hypostases.” They are not simply labeled roles; their distinctions are real but do not divide the essence.

Relation of Origin

The Father’s relation to the Son (Father begets, Son is begotten) and the Father and Son’s relation to the Spirit (Spirit proceeds). These internal relations “constitute” the distinct Persons without splitting God’s essence.

Relational Mode / Self-Standing Relational Mode

A fundamental way (a “primitive”) in which the one divine essence is fully expressed. Each Person is a self-standing mode of being God: e.g., “the Father-mode,” “the Son-mode,” “the Spirit-mode.” These modes do not add parts but mark how the essence is “relationally lived.”

Scripture (Sacred Scripture)

The canonical texts (Old and New Testaments) recognized by the Catholic Church as divinely inspired. Scripture is the bedrock for Trinitarian doctrine (e.g., Mt 28:19, Jn 1:1).

Self-Standing

In SSGO usage, “self-standing” indicates an intrinsic, non-derivative mode of existing in God. Each Person’s identity arises wholly from within the one essence, with no external addition or dependency.

Simple Essence

A phrase expressing that God’s essence is indivisible: God’s being is not composed of multiple properties or constituents. This undergirds the notion of divine simplicity.

Subsistent Relations

Aquinas’s and the broader Catholic tradition’s way of saying each Person is the one divine essence under a distinct, eternal relation (Fatherhood, Sonship, Spiration). The relation itself “subsists,” i.e., stands as a real and irreducible subject in God.

Tritheism

An error in which one posits three separate “gods.” The Church condemns this as incompatible with monotheism and divine simplicity. Recognizing three distinct Persons must not entail three separate beings.

Trinity

The central Christian mystery of one God in three Persons–Father, Son, and Holy Spirit–co-eternal, co-equal, and consubstantial. The Trinity is the bedrock of Catholic faith, reiterated in councils, the Catechism, and Scripture.

These definitions clarify the technical terms used in the argument, ensuring readers grasp the Catholic doctrinal background and the metaphysical vocabulary employed.

Since there are now 32 questions here defending Divine Simplicity, we can demonstrate through argument how Divine Simplicity coheres with the Trinity. However, any argument attempting such a task can, at best, only be coherent within its context—i.e., it is not ad hoc and not contradictory. These 33 questions defend the idea and aim to show the strength of adopting the intended framework below, so one can see how the Trinity and Simplicity complement each other.
Here, God is the irreducible mystery; to cope with this, we employ primitives. Yet on the other hand, God is fully given—self-disclosed—and in this abundance, the truths of the Trinity (itself an irreducible dogma) grant us a sense of God from God. If one grants this intended framework, one should be able to see the combined power of these concepts through argument.

The Argument

Below is a revised but essentially convergent argument for reconciling divine simplicity and a real Trinity, presented from a deeply informed Catholic tradition (drawing on Denzinger, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the writings of the Doctors, and Sacred Scripture). It also incorporates Professor Jiri Benovsky’s emphasis on metaphysical primitives as “problem-solvers,” aligning well with how my own SSGO (Self Standing Givenness) theory treats relational modes.

1. God Is One and Simple (Core Catholic Doctrine)

Premise 1: Absolute Unity and Simplicity

Catholic teaching (cf. CCC §§200–202, Denzinger, Doctorial writings such as St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, q.3) insists that God is “one and undivided.” God lacks composition of any kind (no physical parts, no division of form and matter, no distinction of essence and existence in the sense we find in creatures). Scripture affirms that “The LORD is one” (Deut 6:4), and the Church understands this oneness as absolute simplicity–God’s being is purely actual (actus purus), wholly self-subsistent, containing no “parts” that could be multiplied or added.

Rationale:

1. If God were not simple, God would be contingent, dependent on some external principle or arrangement.

2. The Catholic tradition (e.g., Lateran IV, Vatican I) repeatedly pronounces that God is the “one, absolute principle” (non-composite).

2. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit Are Really Distinct, Co-Equal Persons

Premise 2: Three Truly Distinct Divine Persons

From Scripture and Catholic dogma (e.g., Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, defined in Council of Nicaea and reaffirmed in the Council of Constantinople, also taught perennially in the Catechism §§232–267), the Father, Son, and Spirit are not mere roles or temporary “appearances.” They are hypostases or Personae truly distinct yet co-eternal and co-equal. Each is fully God.

Rationale:

1. Matthew 28:19–baptism “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” indicates three personal subjects.

2. The Church Fathers (Athanasius, Augustine) combat modalism precisely by insisting that these distinctions are real, not illusions.

3. Catholic Faith Must Avoid Both Tritheism and Modalism

Premise 3: No Compositional Complexity nor Mere Modal Distinctions

Traditional dogma (cf. Fourth Lateran Council, Denzinger) is clear: we cannot compromise God’s oneness (simplicity) or the real distinctions among the Persons. Tritheism (three gods) and modalism (one Person with three roles) are both anathematized.

Rationale:

1. Any suggestion that the divine Persons add “parts” or “pieces” to God undermines divine simplicity and leads to tritheism.

2. Denying real distinctions for the sake of simplicity yields modalism.

4. Metaphysical Primitives Are the Problem-Solving Tool (Benovsky’s Insight)

Premise 4: Relational Modes as Fundamental Explanatory Units

Benovsky’s approach in The Routledge Handbook of Metametaphysics highlights that metaphysical primitives–those “bottom-level” explanatory items–best function if they solve real conceptual problems without producing unnecessary complexity. In the SSGO framework, “self-standing relational modes” become these primitives. They are not “parts” of God but irreducible, foundational realities that effectively account for the real distinctions among the Persons without implying composition.

Rationale:

1. If the Trinity is genuinely distinct, we need a fundamental explanatory principle that captures difference without fragmenting.

2. “Relations” can be primitives, especially if they fully express the one divine essence in distinct ways.

5. The Persons as Self-Standing Relational Modes

Premise 5: Each Divine Person Fully Expresses the One Divine Essence Through Relational Mode

Following Aquinas’s language of subsistent relations, and informed by the tradition that processions in God are purely internal and eternal, SSGO interprets each Person as a distinct “mode” in which the one, simple divine essence is entirely possessed. The Father is “self-standing begetter,” the Son is “self-standing begotten,” and the Holy Spirit is “self-standing procession.” None of these introduces extra “stuff” into God.

Rationale:

1. In line with the Catechism (§255), each Person is wholly God, each “consubstantial.”

2. But their difference arises from relation of origin: Father is unbegotten, Son is begotten, Spirit proceeds.

3. SSGO’s contribution: these “relations of origin” are truly fundamental modes (metaphysical primitives), not partial attributes.

6. These Relational Modes Do Not Compose or Partition God

Premise 6: No Added “Properties” or “Parts”

Since each relational mode is simply the way the divine essence is wholly realized by a particular Person, we do not tack on anything to God’s simple essence. Rather, “being Father,” “being Son,” or “being Spirit” is an intrinsic, irreducible stance of the same single essence from different relational vantage points.

Rationale:

1. The presence of “Fatherhood” or “Sonship” does not slice or multiply the essence; it is the essence under a distinct mode of expression.

2. Augustine (cf. De Trinitate) taught that the Persons differ in how they “relate” within the unity of the Godhead; SSGO explicates this in a metaphysical language of primitives.

7. Thus, Real Distinction Without Composition

Premise 7: Truly Distinct Persons Emerge from Irreducible, Eternal Relations

Because “Fatherhood,” “Sonship,” and “Spiration” are irreducible, each Person is genuinely distinct from the other two. Yet, none of these relational modes is an external “part.” This means we simultaneously satisfy:

1. Real distinctions (avoid modalism),

2. One simple essence (avoid tritheism),

3. No composition (remain faithful to dogmatic definitions of God’s simplicity).

Conclusion: God Is Simultaneously Simple and Tri-Personal

From the above premises:

1. God must be simple and noncomposite (P1, P3).

2. There must be three real, co-equal Persons (P2, P3).

3. Only a framework that treats Trinitarian distinctions as intrinsic, self-standing relational modes can satisfy Catholic dogma and avoid contradiction (P4–P7).

Therefore, by grounding each Person in a self-standing, relational mode of one indivisible essence, we reconcile:

• Divine Simplicity: The one essence is never “chopped up” or multiplied.

• Real Trinitarian Distinctions: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit differ precisely in how each fully expresses the divine essence in eternal relational acts (generation and procession).

Benovsky’s Primitive-Focused Justification

• Why “relational mode” as a primitive?

Benovsky notes that metaphysical primitives are best chosen for conceptual “problem-solving.” Here, the problem is explaining three real, co-equal, co-eternal Persons in one God without falling into composition or purely nominal distinctions. Relational modes solve that problem elegantly: they allow irreducible difference at the level of fundamental being (the “Father-mode” is not the “Son-mode”) while preserving the singular, simple essence.

In short, this argument–inspired by the deeply informed Catholic tradition and augmented by Benovsky’s metaphysical insight–teaches that the Persons of the Trinity are each a distinct, noncomposite “relational stance” in which the fullness of God’s essence is possessed. No “parts” are added, no composition arises. Scripture’s teaching of Father, Son, and Spirit as co-equal Persons (Jn 1:1, Mt 28:19) thus aligns perfectly with the Church’s doctrine of divine simplicity (Lateran IV, CCC §§202–211), when we regard these Personhoods as fundamental, self-standing relational modes.