Three person God identified in the Bible?

[Free]

A very honest and accurate take on the trinity theory.

Right out of the gate, the fact that "persons" never refers to God is irrelevant. "Manifest" can mean simply "to appear." And just proof-texting. Brutal video. I honestly don't know how anyone would find that convincing.

 

[justbyfaith]

I believe that the Bible teaches that God is one Spirit (John 4:23-24, Ephesians 4:4) who took on an added nature of human flesh when He descended into time and took upon Himself the nature of the Son (humanity).

God the Father remains behind in eternity; for it is impossible for someone inhabiting eternity (Isaiah 57:15) to cease from dwelling there; since by nature someone who dwells in eternity dwells therein for ever.

But it is the same Spirit who dwells in Jesus Christ who also dwells in eternity (John 14:7-11, Isaiah 9:6, John 4:23-24, John 4:24, Ephesians 4:4) as the one Lord (Ephesians 4:4, Matthew 11:25, Luke 10:21) over everything.

It should also be clear that no one can say that Jesus is the Lord except by the Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 12:3, kjv).

 

[atpollard]

We need to remember there is only one God.
How many people are there here?

Head of State,
Chief Executive,
Commander in Chief,
Head of Government,
Chief Diplomat,
Manager of the Economy
Ceremonial Head of State.

Give me your answer (everyone) and I will tell you if you are right.
.

That’s MODALISM, Patrick!

 

[justbyfaith]

That’s MODALISM, Patrick!

Did St. Patrick teach modalism?

 

[theWind]

No. There are zero verses.


The problem is that you are not actually engaging with the argument I have made. I asked you to do more study on it but you refused, so I provided the answer which you ignored. But here it is again:

There are at least two Hebrew words that mean "one," yachid and echad. Yachid means an "absolute unity," that is, if used of God, it would mean he is a single, solitary "unit," absolutely only one person, as we are. That would obviously mean the Trinity is false.

However, yachid is never used of God. Only echad is used of God and that can refer to, although not necessarily, a compound unity—multiplicity within that one, such as “one nation under God;” that one nation consisting of millions of people. Echad is what "one" in English means and is what is used in Deut 6:4, for instance. It does leave the door open for the Trinity although it neither proves nor disproves it.

Hence why you cannot provide one single verse that states God is ontologically an absolute unity, only one person. There is no verse in the Bible which states that God is an absolute unity.

And as I have previously stated, all those verses that you provided show, is that there is only one God; they prove monotheism and have nothing to do with the actual nature of God.


On the contrary, the doctrine of the Trinity takes monotheism into account, the verses about both the deity and humanity of Jesus into account, those verses which imply the "personhood" and deity of the Holy Spirit into account, and the numerous instances where the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are kept distinct from each other. It also doesn't ignore language, the rules of grammar, or logic.

Those who deny the Trinity necessarily either deny those verses which speak of monotheism, those which speak of Jesus's deity, those which speak of his humanity, or those which speak of the distinctness between the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.


Which is not relevant to whether or not God is triune. Let's look at Matt:

Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, (ESV)

The grammar is once again meaningful. Notice that “name” is singular but three persons are mentioned.

"To be baptized upon the name is to be baptized on the confession of that which the name implies: on the ground of the name; so that the name Jesus, as the contents of the faith and confession, is the ground upon which the becoming baptized rests. In the name (ἐν) has reference to the sphere within which alone true baptism is accomplished. The name is not the mere designation, a sense which would give to the baptismal formula merely the force of a charm. The name, as in the Lord's Prayer (“Hallowed be thy name”), is the expression of the sum total of the divine Being: not his designation as God or Lord, but the formula in which all his attributes and characteristics are summed up. It is equivalent to his person. The finite mind can deal with him only through his name; but his name is of no avail detached from his nature. When one is baptized into the name of the Trinity, he professes to acknowledge and appropriate God in all that he is and in all that he does for man. He recognizes and depends upon God the Father as his Creator and Preserver; receives Jesus Christ as his only Mediator and Redeemer, and his pattern of life; and confesses the Holy Spirit as his Sanctifier and Comforter." (M. R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament)

Notice this particular sentence: "The name, as in the Lord's Prayer (“Hallowed be thy name”), is the expression of the sum total of the divine Being: not his designation as God or Lord, but the formula in which all his attributes and characteristics are summed up" (bold emphasis mine). So we see the "name," singular, expressing "the sum total of the divine Being" as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.


It doesn't need "that very specific information." You are presuming that God would have revealed himself in a certain way if it were true, when he is free to reveal himself in any way he chooses.


I have given much content that supports the doctrine of the Trinity, but you have thus far ignored most of it, so I am far from convinced that "that's all there is to it."


If you aren't getting notifications, you're certainly replying a fair bit to everyone else, which is what I find interesting. How is it that you seem to be getting their notifications and not mine? And why wouldn't you just quickly check to see if I have replied to you?

That's all fine and good, but you would have to produce a bit of Scripture that "teaches" a trinity concept for God. Nobody can just claim a concept about the Bible without the Bible's "teaching" that concept.

Sorry.

Matt. 28:19 is interesting, but proves nothing about the trinity because there is no example of baptism in the Bible that shows anybody baptizing in that fashion. All baptisms in the Bible use the 'in the Name of Jesus Christ' model.

There again, you must have Biblical support for any claim. People love to claim that Matt. 28:19 proves the trinity, but are very saddened to discover that none of the Apostles obeyed that specific direction from Christ. I can only wonder why. It is most likely, based on the evidence that we do have from Scripture, because they all understood what He was actually saying. He was saying that He IS the Father, Son and Holy Ghost - certainly not that He is just among them. Thus, they baptized in HIS Name.

I have had specific members' posts not show up in notifications many times on other sites. It happens.

No, I don't just go back and check to see if the last person I posted to responded. Other threads, other things going on. That's kinda the point of the notifications.

 

[theWind]

Right out of the gate, the fact that "persons" never refers to God is irrelevant. "Manifest" can mean simply "to appear." And just proof-texting. Brutal video. I honestly don't know how anyone would find that convincing.

And your case for the trinity, with absolutely zero 'teaching' of the concept found anywhere in Scripture, is a stronger argument?

 

[justbyfaith]

Hence why you cannot provide one single verse that states God is ontologically an absolute unity, only one person. There is no verse in the Bible which states that God is an absolute unity.

Mar 12:29, And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

Not three Lords.

I fact, I recall reading at one point that the Athanasian creed states that we are forbidden by Catholic doctrine to state that the nature of the Trinity is that there are three Lords..

The Father is the Lord (Matthew 11:26, Luke 10:21, 2 Corinthians 6:17-18), the Son is the Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3) and the Holy Ghost is the Lord (2 Corinthians 3:17).

There is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5).

Here is the Strong's definition for "one" (G1520) in that verse:

(edited: cut out because it created too many characters in the post...therefore I will post it below).

I define a "Lord" as a "Master"

If Jesus and the Father are two separate Lords, then submitting to and obeying both of them would equate to having two Masters.

However, it is written,

Mat 6:24, No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

I contend therefore that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one and the same Lord;

And if one Lord, then one Person;

While they are distinct in that the Father is a Spirit inhabiting eternity and the Son is that same Spirit come to dwell in human flesh.

I borrow the words of one of my favorite teachers; because I don't think that there is any better way to say it than that.

 

[justbyfaith]

Transliteration
heis (Key)
Pronunciation
hice

Dictionary Aids
Vine's Expository Dictionary: View Entry
TDNT Reference: 2:434,214
KJV Translation Count — Total: 272x
The KJV translates Strong's G1520 in the following manner: one (229x), a (9x), other (6x), some (6x), not translated (4x), miscellaneous (18x).
Outline of Biblical Usage [?]

1. one

Strong’s Definitions [?](Strong’s Definitions Legend)
εἷς heîs, hice; a primary numeral; one:—a(-n, -ny, certain), + abundantly, man, one (another), only, other, some. See also G1527, G3367, G3391, G3762.
Thayer's Greek Lexicon [?](Jump to Scripture Index)
STRONGS G1520:
εἷς, μία, ἐν, genitive ἑνός, μιᾶς, ἑνός, a cardinal numeral, one. Used:
1. universally,
a. in opposed to many; and
α. added to nouns after the manner of an adjective: Matthew 25:15 (opposed to πέντε δύο); Romans 5:12 (opposed to πάντες); Matthew 20:13; Matthew 27:15; Luke 17:34 (but L WH brackets); Acts 28:13; 1 Corinthians 10:8; James 4:13 (R G), and often; παρά μίαν namely, πληγήν (Winers Grammar, 589 (548); Buttmann, 82 (72)), save one (Winer's Grammar, § 49, g.), 2 Corinthians 11:24; with the article, ὁ εἰς ἄνθρωπος, the one man, of whom I have spoken, Romans 5:15.
β. substantively, with a partitive genitive — to denote one, whichever it may be: μίαν τῶν ἐντολῶν, one commandment, whichever of the whole number it may be, Matthew 5:19; add, Matthew 6:29; Matthew 18:6; Mark 9:42; Luke 12:27; Luke 17:2, 22; or, that one is required to be singled out from a certain number: Luke 23:39; John 19:34, etc. followed by ἐκ with the genitive of a noun signifying a whole, to denote that one of (out of) a company did this or that: Matthew 22:35; Matthew 26:21; Matthew 27:48; Mark 14:18; Luke 17:15; John 1:40 (John 1:41); John 6:8,70; 12:2 (T WH Tr marginal reading in brackets), John 12:4 (Tr omits ἐκ); John 13:21,23 (Rec. omits ἐκ); John 18:26; Revelation 5:5; Revelation 7:13; Revelation 9:13; Revelation 13:3 (Rec. omits ἐκ.
γ. absolutely: Matthew 23:8-10; Hebrews 2:11; Hebrews 11:12; and where it takes the place of a predicate, Galatians 3:20 (cf. Winer's Grammar, 593 (551)), Galatians 3:28 (ye that adhere to Christ make one person, just as the Lord himself); συνάγειν εἰς ἐν, to gather together into one, John 11:52; ποιεῖν τά ἀμφότερα ἐν, Ephesians 2:14; with the article, ὁ εἰς, the one, whom I have named, Romans 5:15, 19.
b. in opposed to a division into parts, and in ethical matters to dissensions: ἐν σῶμα πολλά μέλη, Romans 12:4; 1 Corinthians 12:12, 20; ἐν εἶναι, to be united most closely (in will, spirit), John 10:30; John 17:11, 21-23; ἐν ἑνί πνεύματι, μία ψυχή, Philippians 1:27 cf. Acts 4:32 (cf. Cicero, Lael. 25 (92) amicitiae vis est in eo, ut unus quasi animus fiat ex pluribus); ἀπό μιᾶς (see ἀπό, III., p. 59{b}), Luke 14:18.
c. with a negative following joined to the verb, εἰς... οὐ or μή (one... not, i. e.) no one, (more explicit and emphatic than οὐδείς): ἐν ἐξ αὐτῶν οὐ πεσεῖται, Matthew 10:29; besides, Matthew 5:18; Luke 11:46; Luke 12:6; this usage is not only Hebraistic (as that language has no particular word to express the notion of none), but also Greek (Aristophanes ecclesiastical 153: thesm. 549; Xenophon, an. 5, 6, 12; Dionysius Halicarnassus, verb. comp. 18, etc.), cf. Winers Grammar, 172 (163); (Buttmann, 121 (106)).

 

[justbyfaith]

2. emphatically, so that others are excluded, and εἰς is the same as
a. a single (Latin unus equivalent to unicus); joined to nouns: Matthew 21:24; Mark 8:14 (οὐκ... εἰ μή ἕνα ἄρτον); Mark 12:6; Luke 12:52; John 11:50; John 7:21; 1 Corinthians 12:19; Ephesians 4:5, etc.; absolutely: 1 Corinthians 9:24; 2 Corinthians 5:14 (15); 1 Timothy 2:5; James 4:12, etc.; οὐδέ εἰς, not even one: Matthew 27:14; John 1:3; Acts 4:32; Romans 3:10; 1 Corinthians 6:5 (R G); οὐκ ἐστιν ἕως ἑνός (there is not so much as one), Romans 3:12 from Psalm 13:3 (Ps. 14:3); cf. Latin omnes ad unum, all to a man. Neuter, ἐν, one thing, exclusive of the rest; one thing before all others: Mark 10:21; Luke 18:22; Luke 10:42 (but WH only text); John 9:25; Philippians 3:13 (Phil 3:14); James 2:10.
b. alone: οὐδείς... εἰ μή εἰς ὁ Θεός, Mark 2:7 (for which in Luke 5:21 μόνος ὁ Θεός); Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19.
c. one and the same (not at variance with, in accord with oneself): Romans 3:30; Revelation 17:13, 17 (L omits); Rev 18:8; τό ἐν φρονεῖν, Philippians 2:2 (WH marginal reading αὐτό); ἕν εἶναι are one, i. e. are of the same importance and esteem, 1 Corinthians 3:8; εἰς τό ἐν εἶναι (see εἰμί, V. 2 d.), 1 John 5:8; more fully τό ἐν καί τό αὐτό. 1 Corinthians 12:11; ἐν καί τό αὐτό τίνι, 1 Corinthians 11:5.
3. the numerical force of εἰς is often so weakened that it hardly differs from the indefinite pronoun τίς, or from our indefinite article (Winers Grammar, 117 (111) (cf. 29 note 2; Buttmann, 85 (74))): Matthew 8:19 εἰς γραμματεύς); Matt 19:16; 26:69; John 6:9 (παιδάριον ἐν, where T Tr WH omit and L brackets ἐν); Revelation 8:13; Revelation 9:13 (Aristophanes av. 1292; Xenophon, mem. 3, 3, 12; Plato, de rep. 6, p. 494 d.; legg. 9, p. 855 d., etc.; especially later writings; (Tobit 1:19 Tobit 2:3; 3Esdr. 4:18 [LXX 1 Esdras 4:18]; Genesis 21:15; 2 Samuel 2:18; Judith 14:6); so the Hebrew אֶחָד, Daniel 8:3; Genesis 22:13; 1 Samuel 1:2; 1 Kings 21:13 (1 Kings 20:13); see Gesenius, Lchrgeb., p. 655); εἰς τίς (Latin unus aliquis), a certain one; one, I know not who; one who need not be named: with a substantive, Mark 14:51 (L Tr WH omit εἰς); or followed by a genitive Mark 14:47 where L Tr omit; WH brackets τίς; followed by ἐκ, ἐξ, with the genitive: Luke 22:50; John 11:49 (ἕν τί τῶν ῤημάτων, Judith 2:13, and often in Greek writings; cf. Wetstein on Mark 14:51; Matthiae, § 487).

 

[justbyfaith]

4. it is used distributively (Winers Grammar, § 26, 2; especially Buttmann, 102 (90));
a. εἰς... καί εἰς, one... and one: Matthew 17:4; Matthew 20:21; Matthew 24:40 L T Tr WH, Matthew 24:41; Matthew 27:38; Mark 4:8 (R G L WH marginal reading); Mark 4:20 (R G L Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading in brackets); Mark 9:5; 10:37; 15:27; Luke 9:33; John 20:12; Galatians 4:22; (in Greek authors, εἰς μέν... εἰς δέ, as Aristotle, eth. 6, 1, 5; Xcn. Cyril 1, 2, 4); with the article prefixed, ὁ εἰς the one, Luke 24:18 R G; followed by ὁ εἰς, the one... the other, Matthew 24:40 R G; followed by ὁ ἕτερος, Matthew 6:24; Luke 7:41; Luke 16:13{b}; Luke 17:34 R WH; Luke 18:10 R G T WH marginal reading; Acts 23:6; εἰς (without the article... ὁ ἕτερος: Luke 16:13{c}; Luke 17:34 G L T Tr; Luke 18:10 L Tr WH text; πέντε... ὁ εἰς... ὁ ἄλλος, Revelation 17:10.
b. εἰς ἕκαστος, everyone: Acts 2:6; Acts 20:31; Ephesians 4:16; Colossians 4:6; followed by a partitive genitive: Luke 4:40; Luke 16:5; Acts 2:3; Acts 17:27; Acts 21:26; 1 Corinthians 12:18; Ephesians 4:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:11; cf. Buttmann, 102f (89f); ἀνά εἰς ἕκαστος (see ἀνά, 2), Revelation 21:21.
c. a solecism, common in later Greek (cf. Lucian, solace. (Pseudosoph.) § 9; Winers Grammar, § 37, 3; Buttmann, 30f (26f); Fritzsche on Mark, p. 613f; (Sophocles' Lexicon, under the word καθεῖς)), is καθ' εἰς, and in combination καθεῖς (so that either κατά is used adverbially, or εἰς as indeclinablc): ὁ καθ' εἰς, equivalent to εἰς ἕκαστος, Romans 12:5 (where L T Tr WH τό καθ', as respects each one, severally; cf. what is said against this reading by Fritzsche, commentary, iii., p. 44f, and in its favor by Meyer); with a partitive genitive 3Macc. 5:84; εἰς καθ' (T WH Tr marginal reading κατά) εἰς, everyone, one by one, Mark 14:19; John 8:9; καθ' ἕνα, καθ' ἕν (as in Greek writings), of a series, one by one, successively: καθ' ἐν, all in succession, John 21:25 (not Tdf.); καθ' ἕνα πάντες, 1 Corinthians 14:31 (Xenophon, venat. 6, 14); καθ' ἕν ἕκαστον, Acts 21:19 (Xenophon, Cyril 1, 6, 22 (27); Ages. 7, 1); ὑμεῖς οἱ καθ' ἕνα ἕκαστος, ye severally, every one, Ephesians 5:33.
5. like the Hebrew אֶחָד, εἰς is put for the ordinal πρῶτος, first (Winers Grammar, § 37, 1; Buttmann, 29 (26)): μία σαββάτων the first day of the week, Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2 (L T Tr WH μία σαββάτου); (in Greek writings so used only when joined with other ordinal numbers, as εἷς καί τριηκοστος, Herodotus 5, 89: Diodorus 16. 71. Cicero, de senect. 5 uno et octogesimo anna. (Cf. Sophocles Lexicon, under the word)).

 

[atpollard]

Did St. Patrick teach modalism?

He must have … there is a YouTube video about it, so it MUST be true.

 

[justbyfaith]

He must have … there is a YouTube video about it, so it MUST be true.

Yes...funny.

 

[Cooper]

Those are roles of one person which is Modalism, not Trinitarianism. Very different.

Those seven persons are the President of America. They are ONE President.
.

 

[Cooper]

That’s MODALISM, Patrick!

Modalism is different. Father, Holy Spirit, and Son never co-exist.
.

 

[BPPLEE]

You're right. There isn't one. There are too many to even put a number on.

I have posted many of them so many times here that I am now just guiding those who don't know to the Isaiah chapters of 40 through 48.

It claims multiple times, multiple ways, that God is ONE INDIVIDUAL PERSON and that He IS Jesus Christ. Not that they are a trio, or a duo, but that God the Father IS Jesus Christ.

It doesn't at all. The only way anybody can embrace a trinity concept about God is to completely ignore, or have no knowledge whatsoever of, all of the verses in the Bible that make the trinity impossible.

The problem with all those who support the notion of a trinity is that they completely skip the step of producing any verse/passage that "TEACHES" a concept that God is THREE PEOPLE.

If you can provide that, I will happily concede.

You cannot.

Until/unless that very specific information is brought forth for all to review in their Bibles, the trinity has no leg whatsoever to stand upon.

This isn't personal in the least. It is 100% objective and is based upon the factual content of the Bible.

Produce the content, prove the case.

That's all there is to it.

God bless and have a great day.

I love you.

List of Pro-Trinity/Deity of Christ Bible Passages - Berean Patriot

Below is a list of basically every verse in the whole bible that touches on the Trinity. I didn’t compile this list, but a reader of this website did and it’s posted here with his permission. (There’s actually a short/cool story behind it.) OR keep reading to get to the list of verses without...

www.bereanpatriot.com

 

[theWind]

List of Pro-Trinity/Deity of Christ Bible Passages - Berean Patriot

Below is a list of basically every verse in the whole bible that touches on the Trinity. I didn’t compile this list, but a reader of this website did and it’s posted here with his permission. (There’s actually a short/cool story behind it.) OR keep reading to get to the list of verses without...

www.bereanpatriot.com

One can post a hundred of those type lists. They are rendered completely irrelevant without a "teaching" in the Scriptures of the concept of God being three persons.

trinitarians do this all the time. They cherry-pick verses from the Bible and say "See, see! This is talking about the trinity!!"

None of them establish the concept Biblically by first producing a verse/passage that even "teaches" the concept to begin with.

Useless.

I could use the Bible to support all kinds of made-up doctrines, but without an actual "teaching" of that doctrine somewhere in Scripture, I am just spreading False Doctrines.

You know who else has used this method of utilizing Scripture to prove a doctrine that doesn't exist anywhere in the Bible?

CULTS

What does that say about trinitarianism?

 

[jaybo]

4. it is used distributively (Winers Grammar, § 26, 2; especially Buttmann, 102 (90));
a. εἰς... καί εἰς, one... and one: Matthew 17:4; Matthew 20:21; Matthew 24:40 L T Tr WH, Matthew 24:41; Matthew 27:38; Mark 4:8 (R G L WH marginal reading); Mark 4:20 (R G L Tr marginal reading WH marginal reading in brackets); Mark 9:5; 10:37; 15:27; Luke 9:33; John 20:12; Galatians 4:22; (in Greek authors, εἰς μέν... εἰς δέ, as Aristotle, eth. 6, 1, 5; Xcn. Cyril 1, 2, 4); with the article prefixed, ὁ εἰς the one, Luke 24:18 R G; followed by ὁ εἰς, the one... the other, Matthew 24:40 R G; followed by ὁ ἕτερος, Matthew 6:24; Luke 7:41; Luke 16:13{b}; Luke 17:34 R WH; Luke 18:10 R G T WH marginal reading; Acts 23:6; εἰς (without the article... ὁ ἕτερος: Luke 16:13{c}; Luke 17:34 G L T Tr; Luke 18:10 L Tr WH text; πέντε... ὁ εἰς... ὁ ἄλλος, Revelation 17:10.
b. εἰς ἕκαστος, everyone: Acts 2:6; Acts 20:31; Ephesians 4:16; Colossians 4:6; followed by a partitive genitive: Luke 4:40; Luke 16:5; Acts 2:3; Acts 17:27; Acts 21:26; 1 Corinthians 12:18; Ephesians 4:7; 1 Thessalonians 2:11; cf. Buttmann, 102f (89f); ἀνά εἰς ἕκαστος (see ἀνά, 2), Revelation 21:21.
c. a solecism, common in later Greek (cf. Lucian, solace. (Pseudosoph.) § 9; Winers Grammar, § 37, 3; Buttmann, 30f (26f); Fritzsche on Mark, p. 613f; (Sophocles' Lexicon, under the word καθεῖς)), is καθ' εἰς, and in combination καθεῖς (so that either κατά is used adverbially, or εἰς as indeclinablc): ὁ καθ' εἰς, equivalent to εἰς ἕκαστος, Romans 12:5 (where L T Tr WH τό καθ', as respects each one, severally; cf. what is said against this reading by Fritzsche, commentary, iii., p. 44f, and in its favor by Meyer); with a partitive genitive 3Macc. 5:84; εἰς καθ' (T WH Tr marginal reading κατά) εἰς, everyone, one by one, Mark 14:19; John 8:9; καθ' ἕνα, καθ' ἕν (as in Greek writings), of a series, one by one, successively: καθ' ἐν, all in succession, John 21:25 (not Tdf.); καθ' ἕνα πάντες, 1 Corinthians 14:31 (Xenophon, venat. 6, 14); καθ' ἕν ἕκαστον, Acts 21:19 (Xenophon, Cyril 1, 6, 22 (27); Ages. 7, 1); ὑμεῖς οἱ καθ' ἕνα ἕκαστος, ye severally, every one, Ephesians 5:33.
5. like the Hebrew אֶחָד, εἰς is put for the ordinal πρῶτος, first (Winers Grammar, § 37, 1; Buttmann, 29 (26)): μία σαββάτων the first day of the week, Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1, 19; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2 (L T Tr WH μία σαββάτου); (in Greek writings so used only when joined with other ordinal numbers, as εἷς καί τριηκοστος, Herodotus 5, 89: Diodorus 16. 71. Cicero, de senect. 5 uno et octogesimo anna. (Cf. Sophocles Lexicon, under the word)).

Do you really expect anyone to read all that? Copy & paste then leave?

 

[justbyfaith]

The Trinity

The purpose of New Testament is to identify the Lord Jesus as the Son of God (because that’s His primary administration for salvation). Though the Three are equal in Deity, power and essence, They are in an order of authority (Father, Son, Spirit - Jhn 10:29; 14:28; 1Co 11:3; 15:24); as the One...

christianforums.net

 

[Free]

Those seven persons are the President of America. They are ONE President.
.

Are they seven persons, seven roles, or seven titles that one person holds?

You asked:

"How many people are there here?

Head of State,
Chief Executive,
Commander in Chief,
Head of Government,
Chief Diplomat,
Manager of the Economy
Ceremonial Head of State."

Is the president not all those things?

 

[Free]

Mar 12:29, And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord:

Not three Lords.

Of course. That is a statement of monotheism.

I fact, I recall reading at one point that the Athanasian creed states that we are forbidden by Catholic doctrine to state that the nature of the Trinity is that there are three Lords..

The Father is the Lord (Matthew 11:26, Luke 10:21, 2 Corinthians 6:17-18), the Son is the Lord (1 Corinthians 8:6, 1 Corinthians 12:3) and the Holy Ghost is the Lord (2 Corinthians 3:17).

There is one Lord (Ephesians 4:5).

Here is the Strong's definition for "one" (G1520) in that verse:

(edited: cut out because it created too many characters in the post...therefore I will post it below).

I define a "Lord" as a "Master"

If Jesus and the Father are two separate Lords, then submitting to and obeying both of them would equate to having two Masters.

However, it is written,

Mat 6:24, No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

I contend therefore that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one and the same Lord;

And if one Lord, then one Person;

This is the crux of your argument: "And if one Lord, then one Person." But it falls apart by presuming a certain meaning of "one," just as theWind 's argument on the absolute unity of God falls apart for the very same reason.

You provided a lot of information about the word "one," but have missed one vital detail--it can also mean a compound unity:

Rom 12:4 For as in one body we have many members, and the members do not all have the same function,
Rom 12:5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

1Co 6:16 Or do you not know that he who is joined to a prostitute becomes one body with her? For, as it is written, “The two will become one flesh.”

1Co 10:17 Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.

1Co 12:12 For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ.
1Co 12:13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit.
1Co 12:14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many.
...
1Co 12:18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose.
1Co 12:19 If all were a single member, where would the body be?
1Co 12:20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.

Eph 2:15 by abolishing the law of commandments expressed in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man in place of the two, so making peace,
Eph 2:16 and might reconcile us both to God in one body through the cross, thereby killing the hostility.

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call—

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful.

(All ESV.)

All the uses of "one" that I highlighted are heis. It looks similar to our English word "one" and the Hebrew echad, both of which simply mean "one." They can refer to an absolute unity, but they also can refer to a compound unity, as I have shown. That simply means that diversity within the unity that is God cannot be ruled out by the use of "one."

Jas 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! (ESV)

And, so, here is heis again. As per the above, it cannot say anything about the ontological makeup of God, and so is a reference to monotheism only.

All that to say, if there is one Lord, it does not necessarily mean there is one person. Here is some of what the Athansian Creed states:

"Gods, but One God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not Three Lords but One Lord. For, like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by Himself to be God and Lord, so are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion to say, there be Three Gods or Three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father, and of the Son neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.

So there is One Father, not Three Fathers; one Son, not Three Sons; One Holy Ghost, not Three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore or after Other, None is greater or less than Another, but the whole Three Persons are Co-eternal together, and Co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity."

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02033b.htm

While they are distinct in that the Father is a Spirit inhabiting eternity and the Son is that same Spirit come to dwell in human flesh.

I maintain the doctrine of the Trinity best takes into account all that God reveals of himself in the Bible: there is only one God who consists of three coequal, coeternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. There has never been a time, even in "eternity past," when none of the persons did not exist.

I borrow the words of one of my favorite teachers; because I don't think that there is any better way to say it than that.

Just a reminder, as per the ToS you must post your sources and Bible version (if necessary).