I've done some more research on this topic and I now know that Trinity is total monotheism.
I just have one logical problem with it and that is:
How can a Being who is totally incorporeal be made out of parts? wouldn't trinity imply a corporeal god?
We don't believe God is made out of parts. The Hypostases (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) are not "parts" of God. God is not divided.
Think of it a different way:
There is God, the Father. The Father is the one and only God. He is often called the "Fount of Divinity" and similar language. Outside of time, without beginning, He begets the Son. That is why we say the Son is "only-begotten". The Son is not "other than" the Father, but is what the Father is, namely, the Son is Himself God, the one and only God. Father and Son are not two beings, or two parts of a being, but the Same Being.
We have a word for this, homoousious, homo (same) ousia (substance, essence, nature, being). Father and Son are same-substance, same-being. That which the Father, is, the Son is also. Because the Son does not arise outside of the Father, but from within the Father.
We then speak of the Holy Spirit as "proceeding", Eastern Christians will say the Spirit proceeds from the Father only, Western Christians will say the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. This is a very old debate and would take too much time to get into here. But the point is that because the Spirit proceeds from the Father [and the Son] eternally, the Spirit too is one and the same God, not a separate god, not a separate being, but is one-and-the-same being as Father and Son.
Thus we say the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, but not three gods, but one God. Not three beings, but one Being. Not three substances, but one Substance. One Lord, one Creator, one Almighty, etc.
So we do not have "parts", but "hypostases". A word in Greek meaning (hypo = "under", stasis "to be firm, to stand"), in effect a fundamental reality of the thing. Thus we mean that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not "confused things", but are distinct insofar as Father is Father, the Son is Son, and the Spirit is the Spirit. And yet the Ousia, the Substance, the Essence, the "Thing-ness" is one, it is the
Same for Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
So we speak of the One-and-Three.
One because the Ousia is unitary, one, undivided, indivisible, inseparable.
Three because there are three Hypostases, that of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Some might argue that corporeality isn't a problem, if that's the case then all is right.
The basic accepted Jewish theology is that God doesn't in any way posses form, but since I'm not familiar with Christian theology maybe it's different?
Christian theology denies that God has any form. The Divine Essence is invisible, unknowable, and infinite.
There is an obscure ancient heresy known as Audianism, Audianism taught that God was corporeal and had form. This was rejected as heresy, and has been regarded as heresy ever since.
The Second Council of Nicea which took place in the year 787 met because of the Iconoclast Controversy. The Iconoclasts were those, likely influenced by Islam, who argued that Christians should not make images, especially images of Christ. The Iconoclasts argued that on the basis of the First Commandment all images of Christ and the Saints were idolatry.
The Second Council of Nicea met, and hammered out the official Christian position against the Iconoclasts. They argued that because the Saints were men, they could be depicted in images, and that because Christ, though God, was also man and came as a man and had physical form He could also be depicted. But that it was forbidden to depict God in His Essence with any form, and thus icons depicting God the Father or God the Holy Spirit were considered illicit.
So while the Council argued that images--icons--were not only acceptable but good, restrictions were put in place in order to not violate the Christian teaching that God's Essence is invisible, formless, unknowable (etc).
So if you see in Christian art depictions of God the Father (which do exist in plenty) these are actually in violation of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (the last council regarded as accepted by all Christians East and West).
But we permit depictions of Christ because Christ was (and is) true man, truly human, with form, with a body of flesh. He was born, He grew, He suffered, He died, He rose again, He ascended, and He is coming again.
That which has form can be depicted.
That which has no form cannot be depicted.
-CryptoLutheran
