> It's not biblical period.

I assumed that my showing you biblical verses would give evidence to the contrary—that the Trinity is assuredly biblical.

> And can you explain why the logos is called theos with the definite article?

Of course. "καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος." θεὸς does not have the definite article. "The Word" has the definite article. θεὸς is the predicate and is anarthrous.

> John 17.3

The conjunction καὶ, used in the ascensive mode, puts "the only true God" and "Jesus Christ" on the same plane, in the same sense that our expression "one and the same"—the "and" joins "one" and "the same" as identical expressions. It implies a connection of equality between God and Jesus. The knowledge of the only true God is through Jesus, whom he sent as "Emmanuel"—God with us. John 1.14 verifies that the Logos, who was one in nature with God (Jn. 1.1) lived among us as God's tabernacle.

> Heb. 1.2

Verse 3 shows the incorrectness of what you are claiming. After telling us the Son was the Creator, we discover that the Son shows us the essence of God. The rest of Hebrew 1 establishes the equality of the Son with the Father, though He is a separate Person. "Radiance" (v. 3) is the same word the jews applied to Wisdom, meaning God. The Logos or Wisdom is the personification of God. He is God with us.

> Isa. 45.5; Dt. 4.35, 32.39.

Of course. There is only one God.

> But we can have a debate on the scripturality of the trinity any other time, right now I'm specifically asking for arguments against the trinity being polytheism.

That's what I'm giving you. The Trinity is not polytheism but rather monotheism in 3 Persons. The New Testament establishes quite clearly the deity of Jesus and the doctrine of the Trinity. This was all hammered out by the early Church and ratified by the Council of Nicea. Trinitarian theology has been established as true for millennia.

> I wasn't asking you for evidence of the Trinity but rather for verses substantiating what you were asserting: the three homoousion hypostases, and where the ousia are identified but not united into one essence, and where the text speaks of three distinct hypostases. But if you don't have verses, then I'll share with you some verses showing that the Trinity is a biblical theology.

It's not biblical period. So why are you asking for verses?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homoousion
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypostasis_(philosophy_and_religion)
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum01.htm
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/ecum02.htm
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p1s2c1p2.htm

> John 1.1: "...and the Word was God." The Word is the subject, God is the predicate, "was" is imperfect: continuing action in past time (what Origen called the "eternal generation of the son: each a part of the other). The Word is pre-existent, Personality, and Divinity, inherently sharing the same nature as God. By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying God is the Word. He also disposes of Arianism because the Logos was eternally God. If he were saying the Word was divine (adjectival), the term used would have been theios. John is not saying this either, but is rather affirming the full deity of the Logos.

And can you explain why the logos is called theos with the definite article? But you don't have to, since the trinity lie dies in John 17:3 anyway. And eternal generation is another contradiction; generation peråtta definition has a before and after. A son per definition has a before and after, and comes into being.

> Heb. 1.2. The Son is an uncreated being who is the agency who created all that is (also cf. Jn. 1.3). This sets him as one and the same with YHWH Creator, and yet separate from YHWH Creator (Jn. 1.1-3).

Once again, Hebrews 1:1-2 conclusively disproves the trinity be asserting that the Father alone spoke in the former days, and through the prophets. Meaning it's the Father alone asserting:

I am the YHWH, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: Isaiah 45:5

See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. Deuteronomy 32:39

Unto thee it was shewed, that thou mightest know that YHWH he is God; there is none else beside him. Deuteronomy 4:35

But we can have a debate on the scripturality of the trinity any other time, right now I'm specifically asking for arguments against the trinity being polytheism.

I wasn't asking you for evidence of the Trinity but rather for verses substantiating what you were asserting: the three homoousion hypostases, and where the ousia are identified but not united into one essence, and where the text speaks of three distinct hypostases. But if you don't have verses, then I'll share with you some verses showing that the Trinity is a biblical theology.

John 1.1: "...and the Word was God." The Word is the subject, God is the predicate, "was" is imperfect: continuing action in past time (what Origen called the "eternal generation of the son: each a part of the other). The Word is pre-existent, Personality, and Divinity, inherently sharing the same nature as God. By exact and careful language John denied Sabellianism by not saying God is the Word. He also disposes of Arianism because the Logos was eternally God. If he were saying the Word was divine (adjectival), the term used would have been *theios*. John is not saying this either, but is rather affirming the full deity of the Logos.

John 10.30. Jesus affirms that he and the Father are one in essence or nature, not one person (substance), which would be the Greek *heis*. if he meant separated persons he would have used the plural. "One" is neuter, "one thing" and not "one person." Identity is not asserted, but essential unity is. Kittel (Vol. 5 p. 1000n329) affirms that, "The term 'one substance,' which derives from the *ousia* speculation, does not really accord with what is stated in Jn. 10.30, 38; 14.10f, 20f., for in John we do not have a static view of being or a metaphysical statement corresponding to Greek thought but a statement of pure action and relation. The unity is living and active." They are of one unified divine essence.

Col. 1.15. Eikon speaks not of resemblance but rather than manifestation of the essential character. God's very nature exists in the person of Jesus. He's not just a separate manifestation but the container of God's essence, i.e., sharing that same essence.

Heb. 1.2. The Son is an uncreated being who is the agency who created all that is (also cf. Jn. 1.3). This sets him as one and the same with YHWH Creator, and yet separate from YHWH Creator (Jn. 1.1-3).

There are many more, but I expect you're aware of them. My point is obvious: the concept of Trinity is not completely alien to the Bible.

Huh? You're asking a monotheist for evidence of the trinity? There's are obviously no such verses since these concept and the trinity are completely alien to the Bible. If you want three homoousion hypostases you need to check out the First Council of Nicea 325 AD, the First Council of Constantinople 381 AD, and Gnostic and pagan Aristotelian writings on metaphysics).

OK, let's talk texts, which is where we get our Trinitarian theology. Take me to the verses about the three homoousion hypostases, and where the ousia are identified but not united into one essence, and where the text speaks of three distinct hypostases. Then we can discuss them. Thanks.

> You have misunderstood trinitarian theology. According to the Trinity, God has one essence. There is one God. But God exists in three persons: Father, Son, and Spirit.

I certainly haven't. According to the trinity they are three homoousion hypostases. The ousia is however never called the one God, the three distinct hypostases are.

You have misunderstood trinitarian theology. According to the Trinity, God has one essence. There is one God. But God exists in three persons: Father, Son, and Spirit.

In the Bible, the Trinity distinguishes between the principle of divine action and the subject of divine action. The principle of all divine action is the one undivided divine essence, but the subject of divine action is either Father, Son, or Holy Spirit. The Father can send the Son according to his power, and the Son can be incarnated according to his nature without dividing the divine essence.

We see examples in nature and science. All physical reality has a dual nature. Mass and energy are in principle inter-convertible, through nuclear fission or fusion reactions. E = mc^2. We can, therefore, speak of the universe as a "space-light-time" universe. It is significant that this motion of light is famous for its mysterious and paradoxical complementarity. It has the characteristics of both waves and particles, and yet it definitely behaves as a wave motion under some conditions and as a particle motion under others. This duality applies both in radiations of electro-magnetic energy and in the atomic structure of matter, in which the orbiting electron likewise behaves both as a particle and as a wave. The two disciplines of modern physics known as quantum mechanics and wave mechanics have been developed from these two concepts.

There are several principles from quantum mechanics that may show us some analogies. The first is called superposition, where subatomic particles are able to exist in two states simultaneously. The second is that of nonlocality and entanglement. The principle here is that objects in far reaches of the universe seem to “know” about each other’s states, and separate particles can behave as a single entity. These may be possible analogies, if that helps.

For another potential scientific "validation" of such possibilities, in 2017 a group of quantum scientists (University of Science and Technology of China in Shanghai) successfully teleported a photon from earth to a satellite in orbit. It's called quantum entanglement. As far as our discussion here, quantum entanglement means that the two quantum objects share a wave function and share the same identity, even when separated. What happens to one happens to the other—wherever it exists. They are more than identical twins, the article said, "the two are one and the same." Apparently, according to the article, when they interact with matter on Earth they lose certain aspects of entanglement, but in the vacuum of space, they can extend infinitely (eternally). It's just interesting.

Christianity is not polytheistic. We believe in one God who exists and acts in the world in three persons: Father, Son, and Spirit.

The trinity is quite clearly polytheism, does any Christian have any actual argument as to why it's not?

According to the trinity; the Father is fully and distinctly God, the son is fully and distinctly, and the holy spirit is fully and distinctly God. The Father is not the son, the son is not the Father, etc. That's three distinct Gods.