As with the word 'us', I understand likewise the terms 'Father' and 'Son' in Scripture to imply in and of themselves personal distinctions. A single man may be both a father and a son, but whenever a father and son are juxtaposed in Scripture they are separate persons. There are no examples where someone is his own father or his own son. It may be objected that the designations Father and Son are merely anthropomorphisms, human imagery applied to God. But I take the opposite view, viz., that Father and Son are theomorphisms, divine imagery applied to men inasmuch as man and mankind are created after God's own image. There would be no earthly families were there not first a Divine protoype (cf. Ephesians 3:15).
A few specific examples of personal distinction: the fifth chapter of St John's Gospel teaches that the Son neither speaks nor does anything else 'of Himself' but that all His actions originate with the Father. If the Son were identical to the Father, one uni-personal God, it would be hard to see how God could say He did nothing 'of Himself'. Again, the Father is said to love the Son, but love, especially an exemplary love, seeketh not its own. Again, the Father is said to judge no one; rather, only the Son judges. If the Son were identical to the Father, then God would here be said to judge no one but at the same time to have committed all judgment to Himself. A little further on, the Father is said to be (along with John the Baptist) a witness to His Son's veracity, while the Son's witness of Himself, if given, would not be true--but if the Son were identical to the Father, then the Father's witness to Jesus would not be true either, inasmuch as it would proceed from the same person. In John's Gospel, the Son is often said to have been sent by the Father. This too implies a personal distinction inasmuch as no one sends himself. If Father and Son were identical, I suppose God would simply go into the world rather than be sent by someone. Further on, in chapter 17, the Son intercedes with the Father for believers. If the Father and the Son were identical, it would be hard to see how God could, in any meaningful sense, intercede with Himself. A related example: in John's first epistle, the Son is said to be a Paraclete or Advocate with the Father. This again makes sense only if the Son is personally distinct from the Father.
All this brings me now to speak of the personal distinctiveness of the Holy Spirit. On analogy with the aforementioned examples, God the Holy Spirit is likewise said to speak nothing 'of Himself' in John 16:13. He too is sent by the Father (14:26) and the Son (15:26). God the Holy Spirit is 'another Paraclete' (14:16) in addition to the Son who is a Paraclete with the Father. The Holy Spirit, like the Son, intercedes with the Father (Romans 8:26). The Holy Spirit, as One sent by the Son and proceeding from the Father, is likewise a witness (15:27). I daresay His witness is independent and thus also true. These things, to my mind, show meaningful personal distinctions between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I would even say they vindicate the truthfulness of what was perhaps a hapless scribal note that found its way into the Textus Receptus (but not the Majority Text) in 1 John 5:7.
-----------------------------------------Return Home--------------------------------------