AN ANALYSIS OF AUGUSTINIAN LOVE AND AUGUSTINIAN LOVE ARGUMENT OF TRINITY.

AUGUSTINE IS SAID TO HAVE INVENTED AN ARGUMENT BASED ON A SENTENCE ASCRIBED TO C HRIST IN ONE OF THE FOUR GOSPELS IN NEW COVENENT. THE SENTENCE IS , GOD IS LOVE. AUGESTINE ARGUES THAT :1] IF G-D IS LOVE THAN LOVE IMPLIES SOME ONE / THING WHICH IS LOVED. 2] THIS THING MUST BE SOME THING OTHER THAN THE ATTRIBUTE OF LOVE AND AGENT OF L OVE. 3]IF GOD IS LOVE THEN GOD IS ETERNALLY LOVE. FROM THESE ASSUMPTIONS AUGESTINE SUGGEST AN ETERNAL HYPOSTASIS OTHER THAN FATHER IN GODHEAD. AUGETINE DID NOT CONSIDER THE LOVE OF G-D AS A POTENTIAL LOVE BUT A N ACTUAL LOVE. AGUESTINE RULES OUT THE POSSIBILITY OF LOVING HIMSEL PERHAPS BY SUPPOSED PREREQ UISITES OF LOVE , AS ACCORDING TO AUGESTINE. ANALYSYS. IF LOVE IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF G-D THEN G-D IS AN AGENT OF LOVE THAT IS A LOVER. IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO OMNIPOTENCE. IF OMNIPOTENCE IS AN ATTRIBUTE OF G-D THEN G-D IS (an) OMNIPOTENT THAT IS AN AGENT OF OMNIPOTENCE. AN ATTRIBUTE IS AN IMPERSONAL THING.AN IMPERSONAL THING IS NEITHER A MUTIPERSONA L NOR A UNIPERSOLAN THING. A PERSONAL BEING [WHETHER IT IS UNIPERSONAL /MONOPERS ONAL OR MULTIPERSONAL] IS NOT AN IMPERSONAL BEING. SO IF THE SENTENCE G-D IS LOVE IS TAKEN IN THE SENSE OF IDENTITY THIS DOES IMPLY THAT G-D IS PERSONAL AND IMPERSONAL SIMULTANIOUSLT.THIS IS A CONTRADICTION JUST LIKE IF SOME ONE SAYS G-D IS OMNIPOTENCE AND NOT OMNIPOTENCE ,G-D IS LOVE AND NO T LOVE ETC. THUS THERE CAN BE NO IDENTITY B/W A PERSONAL BEING [WHETHER IT IS MULTIPERSONAL BEING OR UNI/MONO PERSONAL BEING] AND AN IMPERSONAL BEING. SO THE SENTENCE OF CHRIST CAN NOTBE IN THE SENSE THAT LOVE IS IDENTICAL TO G-D U NLESS OR OTHERWISE HE IS COINING SOME MEANING OF THE WORD LOVE PREVIOUSLY NOT KN OWN [BY TAKING SOME ELEMENTS FROM THE PREVIOUSLY KNOWN TERM OF LOVE]. ANY HOW AUGUSTINE SUGGESTS THAT NO THING AN LOVE ITSELF/HIMSELF SINCE THE BASIC CONDITION OR PREREQUISIT OF AUGESTANIAN LOVE IS OTHERNESS LOVE AND BELOVED. IN MORE CLASSICAL FORM THE ATTRIBUTE OF AUGESTINIAN LOVE REQUIRES OTHERNES AMONG ALL TH E THREE ELEMENTS 1] LOVE 2]LOVER /AGENT OF LOVE 3] BELOVED / OBJECT OF LOVE. HOW EVER THE OTHERNESS B/W LOVER AND BELOVED IS A NECESSORY PREREQUISITE IN THE AUGUSTINIAN LOVE. THUS IT IS IMPLIED THAT G-D DOES NOT AND CAN NOT LOVE HIMSELF AUGUSTINELY. AUGUSTINE DOES NOT MENSTIONS HOW EVER THAT IF G-D DOES NOT AND CAN NOT LOVE HIMS ELF , THEN WHAT DOES AND WHAT CAN G-D DO TO HIMSELF. DOES G-D ONLY SEES HIMSELF. AS IT IS EVIDENT THAT G-D CAN NOT HATE HIMSELF ON THE VERY SAME GROUNDS G-D DOES / CAN NOT LOVE HIMSELF IT IS IMPLIED THAT G-D NEITHER LOVE HIMSELF NOR HATE HIM SELF IN AUGESTINIAN SYSTEM. BUT THIS AUGESTINAN CONCEPT OF LOVE INVOLVES CERTAIN PROBLEMS WHICH WERE NEGLECT ED BY AUGUSTINE HIMSELF. PROBLEMS 1]LET IT BE SUPPOSED THAT G-D CAN NOT LOVE HIMSELF AUGESTINELY INSPITE OF H IS OMNIPOTENCE TO DE EVERY THING, AND LET IT BE SUPPOSED THAT EVEN G-D TO WHOM A LL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE ,IT IS IMPOSIBLE TO LOVE HIMSELF SINCE LOVE REQUIRES OTHE RNESS B/W LOVE (LOVER ?)AND BELOVED THEN LOVE ALSO REQUIRES A BEING TO BE LOVED . IN THIS CASE A NON-BEING HYPOSTATIC PERSON OR A NON BEING PERSONAL HYPOSTASIS DO ES NOT SATISFY ALL CONDITIONS OF LOVE OR ALL PREREQUISITES OF LOVE JUST LIKE TH E VERY SELF OF THE BEING WHICH LOVES DOES NOT SATISFY ANY ONE OF THE CONITIONS THE CONDITIONS OF OF THE LOVE. 2] IF AUGESTINE IS CORRECT THAT THERE IS PERFECT IMPOSSIBILITY FOR ANY ONE TO LO VE HIMSELF, THAT IS THERE IS IMPOSSIBILITY OF SELF LOVE , ONE MAY POINT OUT SOME MORE CONDITIONS OR PREREQUISITES OR BOTH OF LOVE NEGLECTED IN AUGUSTINIAN LOVE. ONE OF THE CONDITION IS THAT LOVE ,BELOVED AND LOVER MUST NOT BE IN SAME OUSIA O R SUBSTANCE. SINCE IT IS MEANING LESS TO LOVE SOME ONE IN SOME ONES OWN OUSIA OR SUBSTANCE. JUST LIKE IT IS MEANING LESS TO LOVE ONECE OWN SELF AS IN AUGUSTINIA

N SYSTEM. IN THIS CASE HE CRISTOLOGICAL LOVE REQUIRES AN INCOMMINUCABLE OBJECT OF LOVE NOT ONLY INCOMMUNICABLE FROM THE LOVER BUT ALSO FROM THE OUSIA OF THE LOVER. THIS W OULD BE JUST A DICTATION OF A DICTATOR IF SOME ONE INCLUDES THE FORMER AND EXCLU DES THE LATTER. 3]IT MAY BE NOTED THAT IF CHRIST BELEAVED THAT :- G-D IS A BEING THEN HE BELIEVED THEN HE DID BELIEVE THAT G-D IS AN OUSIA WHOSE BEINGNESS [EXISTENC E / ESSE] IS IDENTICAL TO OUSIA. IF THIS AUSIA IS LOVE THEN CHRIST IS MENSIONING THE DIVINE OUSIA WHICH IS IDENT ICAL TO EXISTENCE IS LOVE OR PREHAPS THE DIVINE OUSIA WHICH IS IDENTICAL TO THE LOV E IS THE AGENT OF LOVE. NOW THIS OUSIA IF CAN NOT LOVE ITSELF ATLEAST BECAUSE IT ISNOT OTHER THAT ITSELF THEN THIS OUSIA CAN NOT LOVE ANY THING WHICH IS COMMUNICABLE TO IT . THIS OUSI A REQUIRES SOME THING INCOMMUNICABLE TO LOVE . FURTHER IF THIS OUSIA IS G-D ACCO RDING TO CHRIST THEN THIS OUSIA IS A PERSON AND NOT A PERSON IN IT. 4]BACK ON THE STANDERD OF AUGUSTINE IF AUGESTINE IS SUPPOSED TO BE CORRECT IN AS SUMING THAT ONE WHO / WHICH IS LOVED MUST BE OTHER THAN THE LOVER AND THE LOVE T HE VERY SAME AUGUSTINE IS INCORRECT IN NEGLECTING THAT IT IS NOT JUST OTHERNESS BUT INCOMMUCABLITY,OUTSIDE OTHERNESS AND OUT SIDE INCOMMUCABLITY AS WELL.SO IF B Y THE WORD G-D IN THE SENTENCE ASCRIBED TO CHIST G-D IS LOVE AUGUSTINE MEANS <<< AT LEAST ONE HYPOSTATIC PERSON IN GODHEAD OF GOD [WHICH MAY BE CALLED GOD AS WELL OR FATHER OR GOD THE FATHER OR FIRST PERSON IN GODHEAD OF G-D] IS LOVE THEN THIS HYPOSTASIS IS UNABLE TO LOVE IT /HIM SELF AND THE OUSIA TO WHICH THE MENSIONED ABOVE HYPOSTASIS IS HIGHLY COMMUNICABLE. IF SO THEN THE VERY SAME HYPOSTASIS IS UNABLE TO LOVE ANY THING WITH INSIDE INCOMMUNICABLITY AS WELL. SINCE LOVE IF IT REQUIRES INCOMMUCABLITY,OTHERNESS ETC IT REQUIRES OUT SIDE INCOMMUNICABLITY. FO R AN EXAMPLE WORLD IS NOT ONLY INCOMMUNICABLE TO OUSIA OF GOD BUT ALSO TO HYPOST ASES IN THE OUSIA. 5]WE ALL KNOW G-D IS THE LORD AND THE MASTER . BUT ONE MAY ARGUE FOR THE ETERNIT Y OF THE WORD AS FOLLOW. IF GOD IS LORD THEN THERE MUST BE SOME THING OF WHICH GOD IS LORD. IF GOD IS ETE RNAL LORD THEN GOD REQUIRES AN ETERNAL WORLD . WHAT SO EVER IS TRUE FOR AUGESTIN IAN LOVE IS ALSO TRUE FOR LORDSHIP ON SIMILAR GROUNDS. FURTHER DISCUSSION MAY BE ADDED LATTER.