Is the messiah the father himself in flesh?

[Mungo]

Take your time, thanks!

HI,

One problem in discussing God is we do not have the concepts or the language to grasp who or what God is. For example consider Jesus Christ. We believe he has two natures, human and divine, yet he is one person, the second person of the Trinity. But although we can say he has two natures or use a phrase like hypostatic union, can we actually understand what that means? I can see three immediate problems:

1. What do we mean by person in a divine context? We can say the Trinity is three persons with one nature but when we use person in this context does it really have the same meaning as when we talk about a human person?
2. What do we mean by divine nature? Can we understand or even grasp at God’s nature? God is pure spirit. But what is a pure spirit? God is said (at least by some) to be simple in that he has no parts. But we in the west are trained to analyse and break things down into their constituent parts. Can we really conceive of a being that is almighty, omniscient, omnipresent etc. that has no parts?
3. We are only familiar with one person, one nature. Can we actually conceive of what it means to have two natures?

All these are outside our conceptual and language framework. So when we try and speak out them can we possible explain them? This is why we talk about such things being mysteries. Many holy people have penetrated some way into these mysteries and tried to convey their understanding, but I suggest neither they nor us have the language to convey even limited insights. Very often language about God that that attempts some sort of definition seeks more to say what God (or Jesus) is not, rather then what he is.

Basically we express our beliefs about God in analogous terms. Thus person is an analogy and suffers from the limitations of analogies. If you try to argue something from the analogy it breaks down. As I understand it there being three persons in the God refers to the inner life of the Godhead which we can only penetrate dimly (1Cor 13:12). But God only has one substance, wills as one and acts as one, though it seems often as if particular acts are ascribed to one of the persons of the Trinity.

As the Catholic Catechism put it:
The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: "The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle." However, each divine person performs the common work according to his unique personal property.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

The Doctrine of Jesus Christ:

Historic Christianity
Jesus Christ was the virgin born God incarnate who existed in all time with the Father and Holy Spirit in the eternal Trinity. As a man He possessed two natures -human and divine. He lived a sinless life and willingly died on the cross as a sacrifice for the sin of all humanity. (see John 1:1-18; 8:56-59; Phil. 2:6-11; Col. 1:13-22; Heb.1:3; 13:8)

Mormonism
Jesus was the spiritual “first born” Son of God in the preexistence. “Every person who was ever born on earth was our spirit brother or sister in heaven. The first spirit born to our heavenly parents was Jesus Christ, so he is literally our elder brother” (Gospel Principles [GP], p. 11).”And now, verily I say unto you, I was in the beginning with the Father, and am the Firstborn” (D&C 93:21). He is also the “only begotten” physical offspring of God by procreation on earth. “Jesus is the only person on earth to be born of a mortal mother and an immortal father. That is why he is called the Only Begotten Son” (GP, p. 64). His atonement (death and resurrection) provides immortality for all people regardless of their faith. “Christ thus overcame physical death. Because of his atonement, everyone born on this earth will be resurrected . . . This condition is called immortality. All people who ever lived will be resurrected, ‘both old and young, both bond and free, both male and female, both the wicked and the righteous’ (The Book of Mormon [BOM], Alma 11:44)” (GP, p. 74). (See GP, pp. 11, 17-19, 61-77.)

Question: "Do Mormons believe in the Trinity?"

Answer: Mormons say they believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. However, Mormon doctrine denies the Trinity, teaching that the Father, Son, and Spirit do not comprise one God.

According to Mormonism, Jesus is a created being, the first spirit to be born of the Father (Mormon Doctrine, p.129) and a celestial mother (Mormon Doctrine, p.516). Therefore, Jesus could not be the eternal God or part of an eternal Trinity. Mormons also teach that both the Father and the Son are men with bodies of flesh and bone (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20; Articles of Faith, p 38); as two separate people, the Father and the Son cannot be considered “one.”

Mormons also teach that Jesus is just one of many sons of God. Jesus is referred to specifically as “a son of God” in the Book of Mormon (Alma 36:17). Lucifer, or the devil, is another son of God in Mormon theology (Mormon Doctrine, p.163). Further, Mormonism teaches that the number of gods is increasing. Any man on Earth can one day become the god of another planet and populate it with children born to him from his eternal wife (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345-354). Any one of those children can later become a god in his own right (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20). Thus, there is not just One God, triune or not; there are many, many gods (Book of Abraham 4:3).

Mormonism’s founder, Joseph Smith, clearly rejected the Trinity. He wrote, “Many men say there is one God; the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are only one God. I say that is a strange God. . . . All are crammed into one God according to sectarianism [the Christian faith]. It would make the biggest God in all the world. He would be a wonderfully big God—he would be a giant or a monster” (Teachings, p. 372). Other Mormon writers such as James Talmage have confirmed Mormon denial of the Trinity (Articles of Faith, p.35).

It is a mysterious doctrine, but the Bible does teach that there is One God eternally existing in three Persons (Matthew 28:19). Because Mormonism holds a distinctly unbiblical view of God, the Mormon Church should be considered a religion distinct from Christianity rather than a part of it.

(Editor’s note: many of the references in our articles on Mormonism are Mormon publications, such as Mormon Doctrine, Articles of Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, History of the Church, Doctrine and Covenants, and so forth. Others are from the Book of Mormon itself, e.g., books such as 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Alma.)gotquestions

hope this helps !!!

Flagging @DNB too.
(Pt 1, focousing on Christ, before moving on to other topics addressees in GotQuestions thing)

I'm going to do this bullet point style, I apologize if it's a little disorganized--

Jesus Christ:
- Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior and to whom's church I belong. Don't elevate Joseph Smith or any other mortal that way.
- Jesus Christ has always existed.
- He alone is the only Begotten Son of God.
- He alone was born of a virgin.
- While living He mortal life was indeed still God, though subject to all of the mortal frailties (death, hunger, sickness, etc).
- He lived sinless and died on the Cross as a willing sacrifice for our redemption. He alone could do this.
- He is ONE God, along with the Father & Spirit whom are all three different persons. Christ doesn't pray to Himself in the garden.

If there's any points I didn't hit or you want me to hit more in depth or quotation, just ask.

 

[101G]

This would *not* apply to the other Persons of the Trinity, who were not and never will be *mortal.*

that's the problem. there is no other persons in any trinity, listen, Isaiah 43:11 "I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour."
question Randy, is not the Lord Jesus our saviour? but the LORD said, "there is no saviour me", and me is a single person. now the term beside confirm this only ONE person of God. listen, BESIDE: 1. at the side of; next to. 2. in addition to; apart from. see it now, NO is the game changer, ther is "NO" one at his side, or next to him, and as definition #2. states there is NO one in addition to him, or apart from him as saviour.
do you see what the verse is telling you.... THERE IS "NO" SECOND, OR THIRD PERSON OF GOD. that's plain and simple.

so 1 Timothy 6:16 is correct, "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen."

now, tell me what is it you are not understanding in Isaiah 43:11?

I like to hear other people out first.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Randy Kluth]

HI,

One problem in discussing God is we do not have the concepts or the language to grasp who or what God is. For example consider Jesus Christ. We believe he has two natures, human and divine, yet he is one person, the second person of the Trinity. But although we can say he has two natures or use a phrase like hypostatic union, can we actually understand what that means? I can see three immediate problems:

1. What do we mean by person in a divine context? We can say the Trinity is three persons with one nature but when we use person in this context does it really have the same meaning as when we talk about a human person?
2. What do we mean by divine nature? Can we understand or even grasp at God’s nature? God is pure spirit. But what is a pure spirit? God is said (at least by some) to be simple in that he has no parts. But we in the west are trained to analyse and break things down into their constituent parts. Can we really conceive of a being that is almighty, omniscient, omnipresent etc. that has no parts?
3. We are only familiar with one person, one nature. Can we actually conceive of what it means to have two natures?

All these are outside our conceptual and language framework. So when we try and speak out them can we possible explain them? This is why we talk about such things being mysteries. Many holy people have penetrated some way into these mysteries and tried to convey their understanding, but I suggest neither they nor us have the language to convey even limited insights. Very often language about God that that attempts some sort of definition seeks more to say what God (or Jesus) is not, rather then what he is.

Basically we express our beliefs about God in analogous terms. Thus person is an analogy and suffers from the limitations of analogies. If you try to argue something from the analogy it breaks down. As I understand it there being three persons in the God refers to the inner life of the Godhead which we can only penetrate dimly (1Cor 13:12). But God only has one substance, wills as one and acts as one, though it seems often as if particular acts are ascribed to one of the persons of the Trinity.

As the Catholic Catechism put it:
The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: "The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle." However, each divine person performs the common work according to his unique personal property.

Great questions! I really like discussions about the Trinity, since I was caught up for a short while in a Christian cult that was modalist. I had to study and study to wrap my mind around the subject. I ended up with the Orhtodox Formula of the Trinity, in the end, although I tried to couch things in my own terms and understanding.

1st, the language does not fall short, though it seems dissatisfying in our present fallen state of minds. The language is adequate to convey the idea of an infinite God even if we cannot ourselves be infinite and understand what that means by experience.

So yes, the language is, in this respect, "analogous." We can properly understand the concept, but not the whole reality. We are not, however, just "accepting by faith," but also "accepting by reason," because the concept is both logical to our minds, and a matter of convictions within our conscience.

The Holy Spirit Himself, impresses the experience of truth upon our consciences. This is the basis of truth--God pressing upon our conscience, and our mind rationally confirming it.

Father, Son, and Spirit I've explained as follows. God remains before creation as Father. As a Person, He has to be identified and referred to as separate because He must be seen as before creation, and not something strictly revealed within it.

The Father is revealed in creation not as Father, therefore, but only through the intermediary of His Word. Thus, it was the Word that revealed the Father as the man, Jesus. Again, these two Persons of the Deity may not be mixed conceptually, because One is before creation, and the other revealed within creation.

Finally, the Spirit reveals the Father within the environment of creation but not in the form of creation, as the Son was. And so, the Spirit, though He is omnipresent, appears in local places, revealing God in particular situations, in time and in space. This explains the 3 Persons of the Deity as one God, and yet through the revelation of God's Word in order to reveal Him within creation.

God must always be distinguished from creation, even though He can and did reveal Himself within creation and as a part of creation through the Spirit and the Son.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

it's ashame how christians, suppose to be followers of Christ, have been duped by satan in believing a lie. God is one person, a three person God is idolatry by definition.


PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

Back to the elephant in the room that no one seem to want to address.

my question still stands. if there is a second person in the Godhead, and God is one Spirit, how much of the second person brought with him when he dwelt in flesh on earth? well....

was it 1/3 of the spirit, or was it all of God the Spirit, or none... YIKES!

anyone can answer, it's open.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

have questions though. 1 Corinthians 10:17 For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread.

1 Corinthians 12:12-14 For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. [13] For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. [14] For the body is not one member, but many.

Galatians 4:6-7 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. [7] Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

get (I think) what you are saying but (imo) there is the spirit of fear again unto bondage which we receive being conformed unto the image of the world 1 Corinthians 15:49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

In ‘be you transformed (out from this conforming unto the image of the world)by the renewing of the mind’. receiving the spirit He gives (not as the world gives) but the spirit of the Son (not the spirit of fear but the spirit of power and of love and of a sound mind).

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

...that he might be the firstborn of many
So get confused at diminishing the Son (heir) that he might be the firstborn among many ...get (I think) this is by One Spirit and not by flesh ...but Father And Son seem present in ‘they are Sons‘ who worship the Father in Spirit John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

2 John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

(Pt 2 covering other topics) Again, if there's any points I didn't hit or you want me to hit more in depth or quotations, just ask. Also feel free to send me a PM if you want to talk focused without the other sub-conversations going on here.

Bodies/Spirits: The Holy Spirit is person spirit without a body. The Son is a had a spirit before being born of Mary, His spirit inhabited a mortal body during his mortal life, and now a glorified resurrected body. The Bible doesn't actually specify this for the Father and there are differences in this view: LDS Christians believing that he's like the Son, and Creedal Christians like the Spirit.


The Father is the Father of all: duh. Christ alone is the Son of God: perfect, redeemer, all of those tings I listed in #202. Notice the capital S associated with Christ's title. But the Father is the Father of all spirits, and all others are indeed his sons (lower case s). This doesn't remotely mean that anyone else is perfect or anything else - we all screw up and some even flat out rebel. We all desperately need our Savior Jesus Christ.


LDS Christians do indeed believe that Christ's atoning sacrifice powerful enough to wipe away all sins and perfection in a believer, making them a utterly pure joint-heir with Christ.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (nicknamed "Mormons") believe in ONE God, 3 divine persons. The difference between this and theology stated in the Athanasian Creed is that the Athanasian Creed states that they are one through a shared substance and LDS Christians believe that they are one through unity. Both views are indeed monotheism, albeit not the super-simple monotheism like in Islam.

You and I have been over this many times.

We have been over this MANY times. I'm still waiting for your answers to some of my questions on the "What Mormons Believe" thread that I posted over a year ago.

But an in-depth discussion about all that Mormons believe would be off topic here.

 

[Randy Kluth]

that's the problem. there is no other persons in any trinity, listen, Isaiah 43:11 "I, even I, am the LORD; and beside me there is no saviour."

God is the Savior, but He brought about our salvation through Jesus' death. Therefore, Jesus brought immortality to light on behalf of Mankind. God the Father does His works through the intermediary of His Word. Therefore, He is the Savior, but He saved us through the Person of the Son.

We know that God the Father did not save us apart from the work of the Son. You must, if you are a faithful Christian, acknowledge this.

And if it is true, then both the Father and the Son in some sense became our "saviors." It does not, in the least, mean there are two separate saviors, but only that these 2 Persons of the Trinity both acted as "saviors" on behalf of a single means of salvation.

There is only one Divine savior, but He accomplished this through Jesus, a distinct Person within the Trinity.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

We have been over this MANY times. I'm still waiting for your answers to some of my questions on the "What Mormons Believe" thread that I posted over a year ago.

But an in-depth discussion about all that Mormons believe would be off topic here.

I did, but you want me to do it again, feel free to re-ping any in that and I'll address them again there.

 

[101G]

...that he might be the firstborn of many
So get confused at diminishing the son (heir) that he might be the firstborn among many ...get (I think) this is by One Spirit and not by flesh ...but Father And Son seem present in ‘they are Sons‘ who worship the Father in Spirit John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

first thanks for the reply, second, correct but BORN of the Spirit. and that Spirit who birth us is the Son, who is JESUS, for he is Father of Spirits, listen VJ, 2 Corinthians 3:17 "Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

ok VJ, the Lord is Jesus the Son correct, the Spirit is the Father Correct? , but look at what the scriptures say, 2 Corinthians 3:17a "Now the Lord is that Spirit" BINGO, it's the same one Person.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

God is the Savior, but He brought about our salvation through Jesus' death

see you're missing the boat again. God didn't go through anyone, that the problem. listen, who is Jesus Randy? .... read Isaiah 63:5 and get back with me.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[Prayer Warrior]

I did, but you want me to do it again, feel free to re-ping any in that and I'll address them again there.

I don't think you ever addressed my questions about what Mormons have to do to be qualified to take part in the Mormon temple rituals. That was a very long thread, and I don't have time to look the whole thing over. Perhaps a new thread could cover some questions about this.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I don't think you ever addressed my questions about what Mormons have to do to be qualified to take part in the Mormon temple rituals. That was a very long thread, and I don't have time to look the whole thing over. Perhaps a new thread could cover some questions about this.

I'll just tack it this post on to the end of that long thread.

Edit to add link: What Mormons Believe--according to a Former BYU Professor

 

[VictoryinJesus]

first thanks for the reply, second, correct but BORN of the Spirit. and that Spirit who birth us is the Son, who is JESUS, for he is Father of Spirits, listen VJ, 2 Corinthians 3:17 "Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

ok VJ, the Lord is Jesus the Son correct, the Spirit is the Father Correct? , but look at what the scriptures say, 2 Corinthians 3:17a "Now the Lord is that Spirit" BINGO, it's the same one Person.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

yes but ‘after the Spirit’? 2 Corinthians 5:16-21 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. [17] Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. [18] And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; [19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. [20] Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. [21] For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

 

[101G]

yes but ‘after the Spirit’? 2 Corinthians 5:16-21 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. [17] Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. [18] And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; [19] To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. [20] Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. [21] For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Amen, for JESUS, who is Father is Glorified in the flesh. for he live by the Spirit, for what was flesh is now change by the Spirit. which makes Colossians 2:9 oh so true, "For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." the fullness of the Spirit in that body.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[101G]

There is only one Divine savior, but He accomplished this through Jesus, a distinct Person within the Trinity.

well Randy has put food on the table so to speak.

to all who follow this topic, do anyone agree with Randy, meaning the Father save ... "THROUGH".... his Son JESUS.

if so lets discuss it. this could answer the topic question.

PICJAG
101G The "Spiritual Saboteur"

 

[DNB]

Unity in purpose, will, goodness, glory, justice, mercy, power, and all of those good Godly things! I don't find anything in scripture about God's "essence"/"substance" and find many that many people use different definitions of it.

Jesus Christ is the 100% divine Son of God. He has always been, created the Earth, was born of a virgin, suffered & died for our sins, and rose on the third day. He is a different person than the Father and Spirit (like Christ isn't praying to himself in the garden), but they are ONE God.

Thank you very much JD!, ...but, you must appreciate my perplexity here, of course?
You defined 3 separate divine beings, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that by any standard of qualification, or quantification, demands the existence of three gods. But, then, you affirmed that collectively, they are only 1 God.

Did I follow you correctly?
Thanks!

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Thank you very much JD!, ...but, you must appreciate my perplexity here, of course?
You defined 3 separate divine beings, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that by any standard of qualification, or quantification, demands the existence of three gods. But, then, you affirmed that collectively, they are only 1 God.

Did I follow you correctly?
Thanks!

I stick with "person" - I know what a person is.

With all due respect, when folks try to use different definitions for "person" vs "being"... honestly I find it super confusing, unhelpful, I don't find it in scripture, and best understood through the lens of ancient Greek philosophy. I pass on "substance" theology.

I see unity of God preached in scripture, such as in John 17 especially verses 21-23. Yes, the Father and Son are two different persons, but they are also one through unity. To honor the Father is to honor the Son. To follow the Son is to follow the Father, to love the Father is to love the Son, etc. The Son's message is the Father's message. The Father's power is the Son's power, etc. They are one.

in polytheism, like ancient Greeks, there are different gods. You could worship Zeus and not Poseidon. What Athena would tell you to do is different than Hera would. Etc. That's polytheism.

 

[DNB]

HI,

One problem in discussing God is we do not have the concepts or the language to grasp who or what God is. For example consider Jesus Christ. We believe he has two natures, human and divine, yet he is one person, the second person of the Trinity. But although we can say he has two natures or use a phrase like hypostatic union, can we actually understand what that means? I can see three immediate problems:

1. What do we mean by person in a divine context? We can say the Trinity is three persons with one nature but when we use person in this context does it really have the same meaning as when we talk about a human person?
2. What do we mean by divine nature? Can we understand or even grasp at God’s nature? God is pure spirit. But what is a pure spirit? God is said (at least by some) to be simple in that he has no parts. But we in the west are trained to analyse and break things down into their constituent parts. Can we really conceive of a being that is almighty, omniscient, omnipresent etc. that has no parts?
3. We are only familiar with one person, one nature. Can we actually conceive of what it means to have two natures?

All these are outside our conceptual and language framework. So when we try and speak out them can we possible explain them? This is why we talk about such things being mysteries. Many holy people have penetrated some way into these mysteries and tried to convey their understanding, but I suggest neither they nor us have the language to convey even limited insights. Very often language about God that that attempts some sort of definition seeks more to say what God (or Jesus) is not, rather then what he is.

Basically we express our beliefs about God in analogous terms. Thus person is an analogy and suffers from the limitations of analogies. If you try to argue something from the analogy it breaks down. As I understand it there being three persons in the God refers to the inner life of the Godhead which we can only penetrate dimly (1Cor 13:12). But God only has one substance, wills as one and acts as one, though it seems often as if particular acts are ascribed to one of the persons of the Trinity.

As the Catholic Catechism put it:
The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: "The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not three principles of creation but one principle." However, each divine person performs the common work according to his unique personal property.

Thank you Mungo, that was an excellent explanation, in that it was, first of all, comprehensive, and secondly, that you sincerely and astutely addressed the shortcomings. You didn't claim to comprehend the incomprehensible.

Just so you know (maybe you do already), I am anti-trinitarian. But, my following contentions are at a fundamental level, so, I believe, that they should be valid irrespective of one's convictions on this matter.

We are created in God's image, there exists, therefore, an affinity between humans and God - 'be ye holy, as I am holy'. That is, we understand God's character and attributes as far as the definitions of those attributes are concerned. What we cannot fathom or comprehend is the magnitude of each of those characteristics. Existence we understand, omnipresence we do not. Knowledge we fully understand, omniscience we do not. Love and righteousness we are able to emulate, but perfection in these traits often elude us, ...but are not beyond our reach as the previous statement implies, and as the Mosaic Law stipulates. God is a personal deity who interacts and communicates with us on an individual level, we are individual persons with one consciousness, respectively.

But, when one tries to explain God with contradictions and implausibilities, this is where we conclude that one's exegesis is incorrect.
Having three all-powerful persons in one being or entity is a profound redundancy, when only one is required to create the universe, answer all the prayers of men, intervene in human events, provide all maintenance and providence of the universe, etc...
A god-man is an oxymoron in that all that defines divinity, is antithetical to that which defines humanity. God is immortal, man is mortal. God is transcendent, man is secular. God is immutable and incorruptible, man is corporeal and susceptible to decay. God is omnipresent, whereas man is circumscribed in space and time. God is infinite, man is finite, etc...

Thus, I don't believe that trinitarian theology has accurately understood or expressed, what God had intended to convey in His Word. That it, it is your initial predicates that are incorrect, and therefore you are attempting to put a square peg in a circular hole, and will invariably be obligated to capitulate at some point in your thesis on how to achieve this.
Namely: 'For example consider Jesus Christ. We believe he has two natures, human and divine, yet he is one person, the second person of the Trinity.' and 'The whole divine economy is the common work of the three divine persons. For as the Trinity has only one and the same natures so too does it have only one and the same operation: '

 

[DNB]

I stick with "person" - I know what a person is.

With all due respect, when folks try to use different definitions for "person" vs "being"... honestly I find it super confusing, unhelpful, I don't find it in scripture, and best understood through the lens of ancient Greek philosophy. I pass on "substance" theology.

I see unity of God preached in scripture, such as in John 17 especially verses 21-23. Yes, the Father and Son are two different persons, but they are also one through unity. To honor the Father is to honor the Son. To follow the Son is to follow the Father, to love the Father is to love the Son, etc. The Son's message is the Father's message. The Father's power is the Son's power, etc. They are one.

in polytheism, like ancient Greeks, there are different gods. You could worship Zeus and not Poseidon. What Athena would tell you to do is different than Hera would. Etc. That's polytheism.

Yes, but again, you have distinctly defined three separate persons. And, yes, you are correct, we all know what a person is, ...and yet you undermine the definition in your explanation. Persons are a singular consciousness, regardless of their respective ontologies. You are a person, as I am a person, we are autonomous of each other, definitively in will, but currently also in action and purpose. No one can deny this definition.
But, as far as purpose is concerned, even the three musketeers were one in purpose, and all Christians are mandated to become one, as Jesus and God were one.
Please tell me that you are aware of the inconsistencies and implausibilities in what you stated, ..at least, so far?
Thanks!