The Trinity is Biblical

God: the nature of the divine being, the divine being itself. So in the statement "Yahweh is God," the word "God" is a reference to Yahweh's nature, which involves being omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, omnipresent, spirit. Being: a living entity Person: a centre of consciousness, intellect and will, a mind. There is a difference between person, and nature. The baby in her mother's womb has the same nature as its mother (human), but is another person from the mother. We can illustrate it with tornadoes. Each tornado is separate from the next, tornado is their identity (role), but they are all made of the one air (their nature) that is all around us. One air, three tornadoes, one God, three persons. Trinity: One omnipresent being with 3 centres of sonciousness. Each consciousness (person) posesses the eternal nature we call God, like three minds in one body. . There is NO VERSE in the whole Bible where Yahweh claims to be one person. He says he is one God, but never one person. It is not enough for him to claim to be one, but one what? You have not shown where he says "Yahweh your God is one PERSON." The singular pronouns "he" "his" and "him" mean "one single male human." Now, you reject that these pronouns imply that God is human, and you reject they imply that God is a male with male genital organs, and just as you reject these ideas so closely connected to these pronouns when applied to God, I also reject the other idea of singleness of person when applied to God. If you can reject these normal meanings of the pronouns when applied to God, I too can do similarly. Further, THE BIBLE DOES USE SINGULARE PERSONAL PRONOUNS TO MEAN MORE THAN ONE PERSON! Hosea 11:1 says "When Israel was a child (singular), then I love HIM (singular), and called my son (singular) out of Egypt." Here, the sngular personal pronoun "HIM" means a nation of people. Will you now argue that the Israel who came out of Egypt must be one single person because singular pronouns are applied to him? Similar references are Hosea 13:1 and Isa 40:2. In Luke 8:27-33 many demons were in one body, more than one mind existing in the same place, time, and body. This is similar to how three candle flames can be put together into one, or how the Father, Son and Holy Spirit exist as 3 in one. You are the one wh said, "I am simply arguing that since singular personal pronouns are ONLY used of single persons, their usage concerning Yahweh indicates that he is a single person." But I have given you examples where singular personal pronouns are used of grous, which proves they are not ONLY used of single persons as you claim. Argument Invalid. You mention the use of the word "soul" which I see as irrelevant to this debate. I'm not arguing that every single time we see the words "Yahweh" or "God" that it means the trinity. I'm saying that these words can at times refer to the entire group, and at times to just person of the Godhead, just like the word "her" at times means all the people living in Jerusalem, and at other times to just one person. Many times in the OT the Father alone is speaking for himself alone, at other times he is seaking for the entire Godhead, Like in Isa 44:24 where God claims he created all things ALONE, and BY MYSEF. Hebrews 1:2, 8-10 has Jesus sharing in creation; so if Jesus is not included in the God mentioned in Isaiah 44:24, then God had help, and God was lying when he claimed to do it all by himself. This shows God the Father and Jesus are not separate beings. They are part of the same entity so that one can speak for the whole as in Acts 4:12 You went on to argue that "the Trinity teaches that 3 "HEs" are 1 "HE", which is a manifest contradiction." No, its not a contradiction. A contradiction is "two things that cannot be true at the same time." You ASSUME that 3 HEs cannot be one HE, but where does the Bible say this? Or is it just your opinion? The "SHE" at Isaiah 40:2 is many "SHEs" and "HEs" because "SHE" is an entire nation. Is this also a contradiction? You go on to claim: "Another major problem is that if one is to argue that he does not have to conform to logical standards, then with the same argument, one can justify him not having to conform to moral standards as well." Does the fact that the trinity is not logical TO SOME PEOPLE prove that it is not true? A man walking on water doesn't seem logical to many scientists, Abraham's wife getting pregnant at 90 yrs old doesn't seem logical to many skeptics either, and Mary getting regnant without having sex seems most illogical of all to those people. Why? Because the miraculous often contradicts or shall I say, DEFIES man's LIMITED understanding of nature, science, physics, etc. My standard of truth is the word of God, not man's standard of logic. If God says it is so, then it is so. You should learn to use your reasoning in submission to God's word, but instead, you make your reasoing a standard even higher than the Bible, a man-made standard to which you want God to measure up; but that ain't gonna happen. The Bible says Jesus reads hearts (John 2:24-25; Mr 2:6-8), and I believe it; it also says that ONLY God can read the heart (1 Kings 8:9), and I believe that to! You have to reject one of these Bible truths because TO YOU it is a contradiction, but does it occur to you that God is a being that can occupy two tadically different positions at the same time? Jesus is both a lion and a lamb (Rev 5:5; John 1:29), son of David, yet David's Lord. (Matt 22:45) God can be 3 and also 1; no contradiction, excet in your mind. Now as for this argument my opponent makes about if standards of logic don't apply to God then neither do standards of morality, let me just clarify this by saying that MAN-MADE standards of morality DO NOT apply to God and neither do MAN-MADE standards of logic. Men argue that gays should have the right to marry because scientific papers claim proof that they are born that way, that if 2 people love each other they shouldn't have to get married to have sex, and so on. So the question really is, from where do we get our standards? The logic of the Bible allows one HE (Israel) to be many HEs, yours does not. The same can be said for the trinity. You raised the issue of Yahweh being seen in vision as only one person when in fact all this shows is that the Father is only one person. The Yahweh seen on the throne in some visions is the Father. But not always. A comparison of Isiah 6:1, 10 and John 12:36-43 shows that the Yahweh on the throne is the Son. Also, Jesus sits at Yahweh's right hand in Psalms 110:1, so who is the Yahweh who is at Jesus' right hand in verse 5? But sitting on a throne is not what makes him God. Are you gonna tell me that Jesus can't be God unless he sits down in a certain chair? Wasn't Yahweh God even BEFORE he created this THRONE of yours? (Ps 90:2) You proceed to argue that "In the Hebrew Bible, Yahweh is spoken of as having fingers, taking walks in the garden, having white hair, having hands, having arms" and somehow this is supposed to mean that Yahweh is ONLY one person. So a group of persons cannot have fingers? Only one person can have fingers? A group of persons cannot take walks in a garden, or have white hair, or hands or arms? One would think that if you have persons, you would have these things even more so than if you only have one person. What is more, like I said, at times the Bible mentions Yahweh as the whole trinity, but other times as one member of the trinity; and one good comparson is in Hosea 12:2-3 where Jacob, Judah, and your favorite SINGULAR personal pronouns "HE" and "HIM" and "HIS" all refer SIMULATANEOUSLY to the ONE person, and to the entire TRIBE. So we have Judah the man, and Judah the tribe, all at once. Trinity unrefuted. Now, I have replied to your objections to the trinity, but you have not yet said a word in rebuttal to my evidence for the trinity, even though you took up round one laying out your terms.