If you re read your own previous posts you may come to the conclusion that the tenor, wording and approach are unlikely to advance your case.
In response to your comment about my ‘in/out’ language, the context of my comments is important unfortunately you do not listen to what I have previously said so I have to keep repeating myself only usually to be greeted by a longwinded rant. The CONTEXT was part of my discussion with Andrew who writes as an ‘Evangelical’ and for the EA in the Uk. YOU say you are part of a reformed Church and yet you activilay propogate anti trinitarian teaching. This is contradictory and ethically suspect. I have no issues debating in depth with anti trinitarians but not on some kind of basis INSIDE the mainstream Evangelical constituency.
So Jesus is prayed to (Jn 14v14) worshipped Heb 1v6, Called God Jn 1v1 20v28 et al. Identified with YHWH called YHWH Jn 1v23 cip Isa 40v3, When the two titles of God are brought together El/Elohim and YHWH as Lord and God in the NT, the usual ‘split’ is God to the father and Lord to the Son. Not always but usually. The split Shma which Paul uses is a useful way in to understanding the relationship and identity of both. However jesus is Lord AND God in Jn 20v28 and ‘God the only Son’ in Jn 1v18.
Imagine a line between the creaqtor and the created one side of the line is EVERYTHING that has been created ‘without him was not made ANYTHING that was made’ Jn 1v3 by him ALL THINGS werecreated Coll 1v16. So the other side of the line is everything NOT created at any time and we have God which clearly inludes thr Spirit see Gen 1v1-3 and the Son/Word Jn 1v3.
We can downgrade the word and make him a representative of some kind but that is a 4 foot blanket for a six foot bed….IT DOESN’T COVER THE MATERIAL. Assuming simple ‘monotheism’ is just an assumption.
Jesus the Word is not the Father but he is ‘light from light’ ‘God from God’ as the creed says but more importantly he is as Hebrews says
in these last days he has spoken to us in a son,5 whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world.6 1:3 The Son is7 the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, and he sustains all things by his powerful word,8
without the Son we would not truly know what the father is like, as the rays to the sun so the Son to the Father. Tertullian talked of a torch from a torch…. the same stuff. So John 1v1 says not the father of clause b but certainly ‘God’ the same stuff. It doesnt violate the Oneness of God unless we force it too by postulating a GOd and a god.
The Christology highlughted in Cherylu’s link and that in the NT cannnot allow us to accord any other status to Christ than
‘equal with God’ Php 2v6
‘My Lord and my God’ Jn 20v28
To sit on the throne of God and be recognised as such Heb 1v8, Rev 22v3
To confess him as YHWH c/p Rom 10v9 Php 2v11 with Isa 45v23 (context).
You see angels consistently told others not to worship (proskuneo) them but Jesus receieved it often and gladly and the Father commanded it of the angels to him.
‘simple’ monotheism never took off because it didn’t cover the biblical bases then and doesn’t now.
here are some Trinitarian rsources for you or indeed anyone to look at. http://rdtwot.wordpress.com/the-defense-of-an-essential/online-trinitarian-resources/
In the name of the father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.