That is a nonsensical statement. Comprehension is partly subjective to the mind of the individual. It would depend upon numerous factors. You do not have to have a perfect model of something to realize what it is. Have you heard of allegories, similies, metaphors, and other devices used to relate things that are often not fully explainable by direct words? Since everything belief system has things that are not fully understood or explainable, would it be fair that I viewed you beliefs in a similar way?
Why is this nonsensical? God is like none other, you can't compare God even to concepts like love that are commonly expressed in language using similies, metaphors, etc. (Things you mentioned). To say that God can be expressed inperfectly in a similar manner to these concepts is nonsensical. The only things that are available are attributes of God: Omni-Present-Potent-Scient Etc. And these concepts themselves are uncomprehendable. No one can comprehend Infinity, unlimited. So in mathematics a symbol is commonly used to derive an understanding only that this concept is in play, not an understanding on the concept itself.
The word God, JVWH, Allah, etc. (Whatever language, whatever title) given to God is somewhat being used like the symbol attribited to infinity. You see these words and think "Ah the concept of GOD is being mentioned here" having an understanding of what is being mentioned, but no understanding on the actual concept. The concept being all the uncomprendable things that we package together and label as GOD.
Point: Muslims and Jews as well are satisfied with the "Symbol" that represents GOD and don't attempt to understand what or who GOD is in essence or being. They believe in GOD but don't place imperfect models to explain GOD in any sort of comprehendable manner. Christians on the other hand seem to not be satisfied with just the "Symbol" they want to dig deeper and attempt to understand GOD's essence and being. And even though they are unable to have a perfect model they are satified with an imperfect one. Why? I guess so GOD seems more personal to them. GOD is something they can understand (Even though it isn't even in a perfect manner). And why Jesus? Maybe so GOD again seems more personal and more like "ONE OF US" (Human).
I'm not even attempting to determine or suggest who is right and who is wrong. Each side has their own motivations to what they believe and do. I guess it all boils down to Muslims and Jews placing GOD beyond understanding and comprehension being perfectly happy believing in GOD without understanding or any sort of model attempting to understand GOD. Christians aren't. This is simply the difference. The difference alone doesn't reveal who is incorrect, but other things suggest error.
You can view my beliefs any way you wish, but I'd be curious as to which uncomprehendable item you are referring to.
More irrational stuff. You seem to lack in depth of thoughts on this subject. You're saying that since one can not have a perfect picture of something, no attempt should be made to form a picture of it with given information. Well, we just as well shut down NASA, because they do not know of all the unseen particles that they study in their acceleration chambers. I have never seen evidence of that stopping them from continually searching to understand what they are encountering.
How about you focus more on the topic and less on personal attacks, eh?
Yes this is my view, you seem to be very closed-minded of this view.
Now you have made a faulty comparison. Being ignorant and having an uncomprendable entity are two different things. What NASA studies is seemingly finite and with the proper research can become another thing that we learn. You are misusing my view to include ignorance.
Here is my rebuttle example:
If Bob didn't know calculus and I teach him calculus I cured his ignorance. I would be unable to teach Bob what GOD is by essence and being (Anything I state will be imperfect and a bad representation of the truth). Therefore his ignorance is uncured and will remain as such.
Point: To attempt an understanding on a concept that is uncomprehendable is a waste of time, because the goal of attempting an understanding, curing ignorance, will never be achieved.
As far as the Jews: God never gave them information on His makeup of ONEness. He only told them that He was ONE God. He, however, did give them new revelations concerning His attributes that previous generations did not know of. He gave his most recent revelation to not only Jews, but to Gentiles to complete His work of redemption. It is not impossible to see why God revealed more of His nature at the completion of His work through Jesus. If God ended His revelation with Judah, the Gentiles would have been left out of the plan of salvation if one was to follow this logically. And seeing that the OT has been silent for over 2000 years, it speaks more volumes of Judah as not being the endall.
Don't come to me with time arguments "More than 2000 years". Psh, you know very well that time isn't an issue for God. The Jews wouldn't care if it took a Billion years before their messiah comes (Since they don't believe Jesus is the Messiah) and Christians in a similar manner wouldn't care if it took a Billion years for Jesus to return for the 2nd coming.
So are you telling me Oneness isn't enough? If so this confirms my hypothesis above that, at least you seem to be, christians are attempting to make GOD personal and something they can understand, in essence moralize GOD it nearly appears. That is the only way to fully understand GOD, you must moralize Him. Otherwise a full understanding is unavaiable. But I don't think Christians fully moralize GOD like the pagans often times did and still do, they just half moralize GOD so GOD seems more personal and understandable (Almost like a balance between Paganism and Monotheism it seems; not purely one or the other)
I do not know where you have been, but I do not think that any Christian has ever said that the Trinity model has been perfect. It was a conception of people to attempt to explain their beliefs to those who tried to show God as something other than what they believed Him to be (heretics). The Creeds are not part of the scriptures; so you would be hardpressed to see it other way.
I merely pointing an agreement out. Must you be so harsh and seemingly alittle arogant in your response? At least this is the vibe I receive from the words "I do not know where you have been" as if you think my statement is stupid because you personally believe it to be obvious.