originally posted by Truth light
I didn't ask you that. Just answer what I asked:
Neither did Christianity.
This is not the Trinity; so, you argue other than orthodoxy. Analogies are not perfect and cannot describe the Trinity correctly. One must read for themselves if they want to better understand the concept. The simple concept is this: 1) The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all shown to be divine, 2) Each person is distinct from the other, 3) The divine persons are not persons as humans are, 4) Each person is eternal, and 5) All 3 persons are coequal and indivisible.
By reading the NT, all of these things can be seen as characteristics of each person of the Trinity. As a consequence of seeing these characteristics and others, the concept of Trinity was coined where these characteristics were formulated into one basic teaching.
But, there are. Don't believe what you hear.

That was not a point I was making. I was simple trying to get you to think beyond the point that you are at right now. I said this: For example, did Abraham know about the Kosher food laws of the Jews? Who kept that a secret?
Now answer the question so that you can come to see my point. My point is that revelation inherently adds new understanding to old principles or introduces new principles. It is never stagnant, unless it has come to an end.

It is ironic that you state the very thing that you are refuting. :o Perhaps you can better understand the concept of Trinity if you are willing to assert this little nugget of truth.

Now, what do you have against God revealing the Trinity to people of a late time (NT) and not in the OT? I do know that if the shoe was on the other foot, you would be saying that Allah knows best.
Hint: the Trinity will never make sense if one does not at least try to see it in context of the scripture that it was revealed in.