My view is affirmatively presented by scripture - it is the Trinitarian position that is contrived (legitimately or not) by speculation and arguments of interpretation and reason. So, that's where the argument must be.dwight92070 wrote: - I am responding to claims of Trinitarians as to what their own passages mean. The affirmative case of monotheism is (I hope) fairly non-
Dwight: So you would rather "muddy the waters" of the clear scriptural teaching of the fact that Jesus is God and the Trinity, than to come up with scriptures that support your view. Again, we are both monotheistic.
And your claim of monotheism can only be made by resort to "mystery" in the clear and otherwise admitted incoherence of the position. Merely saying you are monotheist begs the question how. Mystery best lies in clear revelation of the "what" without the "how or why". When the "what" is largely by implication, mystery should suggest the implication is perhaps misguided. God may reveal things that can't be fully understood, but when they matter, they are largely comprehensible and coherent. When we have to rely on mystery to overcome fundamental comprehension or coherence, I suggest that something's wrong with our position.