Now that you've pondered the above, it is worth noting that the key part of this is the line:
Quote:
|
Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.
|
The distinction is between person and substance. One substance, three persons. Before people start sounding off on consistency, both "person" and "substance" have highly technical meanings in philosophy. Specifically, a "person" is an "individual substance of a rational nature." Now please hold all charges of circularity until after I'm done.
A "substance" is something not easily defined, and has many meanings. Substance as contrasted with person can be understood in terms of essence. Basically it is an inquiry into "What is God?"
"Individiual substance" as used in the definition of person has a different meaning, specifically, the idea of assumptibility is excluded, but it is included in "substance" above. When we're talking about persons, we're talking about 'identity' answering the question "Who is God?"