The Law of God and the Trinity [Trans. by Jonathan Cullings]

[The following is a smaller portion of the entire fragment which can be downloaded here. Futon gave the address to The International Metaphysics Convention in ’72.]

              …When we say that the Law of God reflects the character of God, we mean this: God, being both God and neighbor to Himself in the intratrinitarian relations between Father and Son and Spirit, is Love. All three Persons love One Another perfectly and equally. The statement “God is Love” is not a substanceless sentiment, therefore, but a profound insight into the perfectly Good Nature of God, of which His Law is a reflection. All Law, Christ tells us, falls beneath the Two Great Commandments, viz., to love God with all of one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as oneself, but the apostle takes this one step further by emphasizing that “Love is the fulfillment of the Law,” meaning that love does no harm to one’s neighbor. Love, then, finds its origin in the Triunity of God who loves Himself – Father and Son and Spirit – with infinite precision and perfection.

[Download the entire fragment here: The Law of God and the Trinity]


The Counsel of the Wicked Vs. The Law of the Lord (Pt. 1)

[Beneath Futon’s desk, adjacent to a burnt collection of photographs of Holland, a scattering of napkins were found with the following notes scribbled on them. I have enumerated them according to the themes shared among them.]

[1.]…hence, the conclusion does not follow from the premises. One wonders, however, where he[1] obtained the idea. Was it from Plato? No. He was no Platonist. He was a Plotinian philosopher. That hideous mustache of his could not hide the lips beneath that one can virtually hear singing from the pages of his writing: In order to go beyond good and evil, I must presuppose the inherent goodness of such a transgression against the ethics of the slaves! I believe, I truly believe, in a Good even more substantial than Plato’s – I simply don’t name it Goodness. I call it “POWER.”[2]

Psalm 14:1.[3]

[2.] That the Word was in the beginning with God is no small thing.[4] For it is this Word that is the Yay and Amen of the Father, meaning this, namely: There was a never a time in which anything was not under His Sovereignty, for as the Word of God, He is the expression of God, the exact Image of God who, within Himself, is the storehouse of all wisdom and knowledge. This is no Neoplatonism, however, for the Son is not the Father, but His Word. He is distinct from the Father and the Spirit and yet One with them as God. We are Christians, not Neoplatonists. If we were Neoplatonists then predication would be an impossibility. But, last I checked, there are still words and voices and bodily movements in the world. Now, we may utilize opposing hermeneutical principles, but we, nonetheless, do interpret all things. Why? Because we presuppose that all of what a thing is is definable in itself. The anti-essentialists make the claim that things are without essence. But is this not something that only an essentialist would say? Language demands that things be defined, but our finitude disallows our fully grasping what things truly are. We are like Adam, to whom God brought the animals to see what he would name them.[5]

Yet, herein lies that most fundamental of differences between ourselves and our progenitor:

He was IN the Garden; we have been kicked out.[6]

[3.]”In all this,” the writer says, “Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly.”[7]And what many fail to learn from the book of Job is that God is the author of all events, and He discloses His operations to us as He sees fit. This means, of course, that the nature of God’s thought and that of man’s is qualitatively different. Job knew not the hearts of his children, nor the workings of God, nor the accusations of Satan. God, contrarily, knew all that was occurring, seeing as He ordered the events to occur. This is to say: the Lord’s knowledge is not obtained, but possessed eternally.

[4.]…and what is the mythological but natura partum in statua vir[8]? They go beyond the senses in establishing their nonsensical theories, and speak of a beyond which is explicable in our present language. They decry our use of analogical language to speak of the Lord, yet they utilize such language every time they speak of what caused the universe to be – a statement which presupposes:

i. an ontologically prior “what”

ii. time


iii. space

[1] F.W. Nietzsche

[2] Futon is criticizing Nietzsche here on quite a few accounts. In the first place, Futon argues that Nietzsche’s gradation of beings (from the nobility, which rests at the top of the social ontos, to the slaves, which rest at the bottom of the social ontos), and their corresponding morals or values are not a movement beyond Platonism, but the logical outgrowth of Plotinus’ Neoplatonic philosophy. In the second place, Futon emphasizes that, contrary to the conclusions of our postmodern revisionists (e.g. Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze, etc), Nietzsche’s socialized hierarchy of beings are emanations of the one “Good” which Nietzsche re-names “Power.” And, finally, in the third place, Futon emphasizes that Nietzsche’s own attempt to move beyond good and evil presupposes the Goodness of rebellion against slave morality and, hence, presupposes that all being and action are derivative of the One, which Nietzsche calls Power.

[3] “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.” (Holy Bible, King James Version)

[4] The allusion is to John 1:1, which reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

[5] Genesis 2:19: “And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.” (KJV)

[6] Futon is here underscoring the Calvinist teaching on “Total Depravity.” According to Calvinists, the fall’s effects were not only spiritual (i.e. covenantal) and physical, but also noetic.

[7] Job 1:22 (KJV)

[8] “Nature made in the image of man.” One of Futon’s main influences, Severinus of Noricum, writes in his “Seven Treatises Concerning the Absurdities of Trophius the Atheist,”:

Thou knowest Him, and thou knowest that thou knowest. For hadst thou known not, thou would’st not have spoken thus, saying:

“The highest heaven of heavens is geometrically identifiable.”

For, no matter what extension thou givest it – Aerion granteth it flatness, as the smooth surface of a stone; Relias calleth it a rectangular plane; and still others speak of it as a circle, or spiral, or any other form – geometricity presupposeth space. And thou claimest to speak on behalf of that which was prior to space itself. Yay, even the mother of all inhabitability! Thou art a fool, Trophius, and knowest it not!

Thou should’st state openly what thy credo is –

natura partum in statua vir”

For thou art no wiser than thy pagan, Greek elder brothers. In concretizing that which existed before existence itself, thou speakest not only in absurdities, but in the language of the pagan mythologists.


{Treatise 3, Can. 24, Sec. 8}


[To D. Rison]

There are two things that are most disturbing to me about Nietzsche’s writings:

(i.)that the man was deluded enough to believe so strongly in, and so viciously attack, his own strawman


(ii.)that so many Christians were unable to tell the difference between their faith and Nietzsche’s misrepresentation of it…


Somewhere in the writings of the Dane, I came across the denunciation of the scientific method, wherein he excoriates: (i.)inductive reasoning, which by its own definition cannot ever reach certainty but can only feign levels of approximation within arbitrarily fixed parameters, and (ii.)the assumption that Truth (which can only be uttered by God) is the end result of a chain of inductive reasoning…