Who Said the Doctrine of the Trinity Is Irrelevant?

"The transcendent independence of the Trinity, as Wholly Other, allows the act of creation to be a sheer act of the Trinity's loving goodness and freedom.  Because they (the Father, Son, and Spirit) possess no self-fulfilling needs, they are motivated solely by their beneficent and altruistic love to bring others into existence and so bestow upon them their goodness" (Thomas Weinandy, Does God Suffer?, p. 143).  

Weinandy Waxes Eloquent

Thomas Weinandy's Does God Suffer? has been, for me, a gem on the doctrine of God.  Here are some of his reflections on the teaching of the OT:

"The Old Testament never conceives of God's transcendence in opposition to his immanence, as if that which makes God wholly other is different from that which allows him to be a personal God who lovingly acts in time and history.  For the Bible, transcendence and immanence do not describe two divine modes of being or two sets of distinguishing qualities - one as God is apart from the created order and another as he is in relation to the created order.  For God to be transcendent in the biblical understanding means that he is wholly other than the created order but not apart from the created order.  That which makes him divine, and thus wholly other and so transcendent, is that which equally allows him to be active within the created order and so be immanent.  There is no opposition between God's transcendent being and his immanent activity" (p. 56).  

I may post something on Weinandy's take on impassibility itself, but any thoughts for now?