If you're well-versed and well-studied in Trinitarian theology, you probably don't need to or want to discuss it, but if you do wish that, we can discuss it. It seems apparent that you think trinitarianism is polytheistic, but if you're well-studied in it, you know how trinitarianism differs from polytheism in that the Trinity is one essence whereas polytheistic deities are multiple essences. We can talk about if you want, but possibly you feel that your research is sufficient. As you wish. Reply with your subject or question if you want, or start a new thread and let others kibitz on it.

> Then you misunderstand trinitarian theology. We can discuss it if you want.

Not at all, I'm very well-versed in trinitarian theology. We can definitely discuss it if you want.

> call God a "he" for several reasons: (1) God is a person with personality, not a force or an "it." In English we have no other choices. (2) Though God does not have gender, the Bible consistently refers to him as "he." I follow a biblical model. (3) There are other reasons to consider God a "he" rather than a "she", the primary one being that it eliminates the confusion of making God's acts sexual as were often the case in the ancient world. But there's more. We can talk about it if you want.

I didn't object to the gender as you well know. There are three "he" in the trinity, not one. Like I said, trinitarians always contradict themselved and their own doctrine when they aren't cautious.

> In this case, the "he" is the one God. All three Persons of the Trinity are the divine essence involved in the program of covenant, revelation, and relationship.

There isn't a one God in the trinity, and there isn't a one overarching "he" either, that's modalism.

> I'm definitely not mistaken. And that's also why you unintentionally admit polytheism and contradict yourselves when you forget to guard your tongues, and don't don't follow the necessary semantic detours.

Then you misunderstand trinitarian theology. We can discuss it if you want.

> Like calling God a he.

I call God a "he" for several reasons: (1) God is a person with personality, not a force or an "it." In English we have no other choices. (2) Though God does not have gender, the Bible consistently refers to him as "he." I follow a biblical model. (3) There are other reasons to consider God a "he" rather than a "she", the primary one being that it eliminates the confusion of making God's acts sexual as were often the case in the ancient world. But there's more. We can talk about it if you want.

> Jesus revealed no such thing. If he did, he would per definition be a false prophet. But he didn't.

Jesus is the ultimate revelation of God. He was the agent of creation and will be the heir of all creation in the eschaton (Ps. 2.8). He is the visible manifestation of the Father's Shekinah glory and the exact representation of His being. Jewish authors often said that divine Wisdom was the exact “image” of God, the prototypical stamp by which he “imprinted” the seal of his image on the rest of creation (the way an image was stamped on coins.). Psalm 2.

> And one personal God can never be non-personal.

But if God is solely singular, as Boot writes, there is no subject-object relationship and therefore He is non-personal.

> And the trinity doesn't have an absolute personality, it has three, four if we're following proper orthodoxy.

Do you have an explanation of this? Just stating it doesn't carry weight.

> I only asked which "he" you're referring to? There are three "he"'in the trinity, so which of the three did you have in mind?

In this case, the "he" is the one God. All three Persons of the Trinity are the divine essence involved in the program of covenant, revelation, and relationship.

> Then you are mistaken, my good sir or madam.

Sir. And no, I'm definitely not mistaken. And that's also why you unintentionally admit polytheism and contradict yourselves when you forget to guard your tongues, and don't don't follow the necessary semantic detours. Like calling God a he.

> If God is not the triune Lord revealed in Jesus Christ, then the doctrine of creation is rendered impossible, and man is part of a cosmic chain of being.

Jesus revealed no such thing. If he did, he would per definition be a false prophet. But he didn't.

> This is because a monadic conception of God as some kind of singularity leaves us with the emptiness and void of non-personality as ultimate reality. If there is no plurality within God’s being, then there is no subject-object relationship, no particularity, but instead only a blank unity. In such a view of God there can be no foundation for knowledge, love, morality, or ethics. Indeed, without an absolute personality, there is no diversity or distinction basic to reality at all; ultimate reality is a bare unity about which nothing may be said.

Monotheistic, not monadic. And one personal God can never be non-personal. And the trinity doesn't have an absolute personality, it has three, four if we're following proper orthodoxy. And this sounds like you're paraphrasing your typical, meaningless Ravi Zacharias sophistry. It was actually from Dr. Joe Boot of the Ezra Institute.

I only asked which "he" you're referring to? There are three "he"'in the trinity, so which of the three did you have in mind? God the father?
Or God the holy spirit? Or God the son maybe? Who's the he?

> I happen to know for a fact you aren't.

Then you are mistaken, my good sir or madam.

> But why did you refer to God as "he"

I refer to God as "he" because both the Tanakh and the New Testament do so. God is always referred to in the singular masculine. And when he is referred to as Elohim (a plural), a singular verb is used to denote HIs singularity.

> There are three "he" in the trinity, so which of the three are you referring to?

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.

If God is not the triune Lord revealed in Jesus Christ, then the doctrine of creation is rendered impossible, and man is part of a cosmic chain of being. This is because a monadic conception of God as some kind of singularity leaves us with the emptiness and void of non-personality as ultimate reality. If there is no plurality within God’s being, then there is no subject-object relationship, no particularity, but instead only a blank unity. In such a view of God there can be no foundation for knowledge, love, morality, or ethics. Indeed, without an absolute personality, there is no diversity or distinction basic to reality at all; ultimate reality is a bare unity about which nothing may be said. This is why the Trinity is so important in tackling the philosophical problem of the one and the many. Moreover, because a denial of the Trinity leads to a denial of an absolute personality, we cannot speak coherently of the will of God. Only persons have a will. But if God has no will, then creation is not the free act of an absolute, personal God. Rather, the universe is the emanation of divine being, and what we call the universe is merely the extension of god, or, as some pagans would say, it is the body of god.

In other words, trinitarian monotheism is essential to creation, to relationship, and to will, all of which are necessary attributes of God.

I happen to know for a fact you aren't. But why did you refer to God as "he"? There are three "he" in the trinity, so which of the three are you referring to?

I sure am. We Christians, as I'm sure you know, are trinitarian monotheists.

> He ... He ... He ... He... Etc.

Not a trinitarian?

God has a plan in history that he is sovereignly executing, the goal of which is for Him to be in relationship with the people whom He has created. It would be difficult, if not impossible, for people to enter into a relationship with a God whom they do not know. If His nature were concealed, obscured, or distorted, an honest relationship would be out of the question. In order to clear the way for this relationship, then, God has undertaken as a primary objective a program of self-revelation. He lets us know what He is like. He wants people to know Him. That's what the Bible is: God's revelation of Himself to us, so we can enter into relationship with Him. This is how we know what God is like. He has told us what His attributes are. The truth of God's attributes are not discerned by looking at the world we live in, which has been mangled almost beyond recognition but us humans, but by reading God's revelation of Himself to us (which is also honest about the mess we have made of things).

No, I wasn't looking for a biblical answer. I was just curious how did you arrive to conlusion that god exhibits these attributes. All-powerful and all-knowing. Based on the world we live in, I have no idea how did you made that conclusion. Same goes for most of the others - love, moral and so on. That is why I wanted to know.