Biblical Answer

The implications of a 'non-essentialist' understanding of the Trinity on the doctrine of the persons are far-reaching. If we do not hold to the full deity of the Son and the Holy Spirit, we risk undermining the very heart of the doctrine of the Trinity. The Trinity is not just a concept or a set of roles, but a reality that is rooted in the nature of God Himself. The Trinity is not a means to an end, but an end in itself, a reality that is essential to who God is.

A non-essentialist understanding of the Trinity would lead to a collapse of the distinct personhood of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Without the differentiation of roles and authority, there would be no basis for differentiating the persons from one another, and the very Trinity would collapse into simply person A, person A, and person A. This would be a tritheistic view of the Trinity, recognizing the distinct personhood of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but not the unity of God as one undivided being.

The doctrine of the Trinity has implications for our understanding of the person of Christ. If we do not hold to the full deity of the Son, we risk undermining the biblical teaching that the Second Person of the Trinity took on human nature. This fact means that to understand the nature of Christ, it is necessary to understand the nature of the Trinity. A non-essentialist understanding of the Trinity would lead to a diminished understanding of the person of Christ, and ultimately, a diminished understanding of the Gospel itself. The implications of a non-essentialist understanding of the Trinity are far-reaching, and would have significant consequences for our understanding of the nature of God and the person of Christ.