You're therefore insulting God. God said he is one and there is no other.
You keep repeating this without addressing counter-arguments. Repeating something does not make it true. As has been repeated to you, Trinitarianism fully affirms monotheism, that there is only one true, living God.
God is holy spirit. There is not God and then a separate holy spirit. That's not scripture.
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)
Joh 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper, to be with you forever,
Joh 14:17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him. You know him, for he dwells with you and will be in you.
...
Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you. (ESV)
2Co 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. (ESV)
Eph 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. (ESV)
And on it goes. The main problem for you here is that Trinitarianism correctly recognizes the
continual distinction the Bible makes between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. If they are all one and the same, this continual distinction is pointless.
God begat himself into the body of Mary. Entirely. God created the first humans therefore God created himself to appear human when Emmanuel, God with us, which can't become much clearer when God used a Hebrew name to inform all who heard it when introduced to Emmanuel in Jewish society whom they were encountering, was born of woman and was entirely created by God his Father.
A couple of serious problems with this. First, if God created himself to appear as human, then two issues arise: (1) God only appeared human and wasn't actually human, and (2) if he was really human, then he wouldn't have a fallen human nature that we have all inherited from Adam, which means he wasn't truly human, possibly not even susceptible to temptation, which makes his temptations pointless. Rather, we
know that Jesus was fully human, that his human nature wrestled with his divine nature, that he struggled with temptation in some way yet did not sin.
Second, a father is
never his own son, nor a son his own father. Not only is that a logical absurdity, it renders the analogy of the Father/Son relationship meaningless. If the Father and Son are separate "persons," and they are, it brings significant meaning to much of Scripture, particularly with respect to us. You must seriously consider the whole purpose and significance of God relating to us largely through a Father/Son relationship.
Hear oh Israel our God our God is one.
I already addressed the main issue with this but you didn't respond. In addition to what I stated earlier, you even provided a Hebrew rendering of the Shema (Deut. 6:4). In that, we see that when God says he is "one," the word used is
'echad. If God had wanted to say he was an absolute unity (which is what you are trying to make the verse say),
yachid would have been the word to use. It is telling that the Bible
never uses
yachid of God. Instead, the Bible uses '
echad, which is the same as the English word "one" and
can be used as a compound unity. Hence why I stated that the verse says nothing either way
but it does leave the door wide open for a Trinitarian understanding of God.
A compound unity is something like: "One nation under God." There is only one nation, yes, but that tells us nothing about the nature of that nation. It could be a nation of 100 people, 35 million people, 350 million people, etc.
God is holy spirit. Jesus said himself when you have seen him you have seen the Father.
Denying that very simple statement by Emmanuel himself is saying Emmanuel had no idea what he was talking about. False dichotomy, logical fallacy demonstrating flawed thinking.
The false dichotomy here is on your part. You are saying that the only two understandings of this text is that Jesus either was the Father or he didn't know what he was talking about. But one other alternative is that your understanding of the text is wrong.
Look at some of the context of John 14:19:
Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
Joh 14:10 Do you not believe that
I am in the Father and
the Father is in me? The words that I say to you I do not speak on my own authority, but
the Father who dwells in me does his works.
Joh 14:11 Believe me that
I am in the Father and
the Father is in me, or else believe on account of the works themselves.
Joh 14:12 “Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because
I am going to the Father.
...
Joh 14:24 Whoever does not love me does not keep my words. And
the word that you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me. (ESV)
Notice that Jesus does not say that "I am the Father and the Father is me". Whatever Jesus means by "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father," he most certainly
cannot mean that he is the Father, otherwise it creates an even
greater difficulty in much of what he says following that in this chapter alone, never mind the rest of Scripture. Jesus
clearly distinguishes himself from the Father, yet claims equality with him.
Tritheism is pagan. And not of God.
Of course tritheism is pagan and not of God, but that is not at all what we're discussing. This is about the Trinity, the triune nature of God. You simply lose credibility when you either cannot tell the difference between tritheism and the Trinity, or setup the straw man of tritheism and using it to argue against the Trinity.
