Two types of unity?

honeto- no I have not forgotten.  That supports my belief.  all parts are egual to each other, but all parts united as GOD.  The whole is always greater then just a portion of the whole.

israfil- It sound as if you are able to understand the 3 manifestations of GOD.  If Mohamad had said that Allah was the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then you would have been able to believe it.

Attributes are not emotions, but different personalities?  "God's attributes transcends all things physical and comprehensible" 

Are we closer in thought then we realize?

Yes, but you still do not understand. 

Equal components of one, but the Son was sent by the Father, and the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father and Son [some say just the Father]. 

Each manifestation has had a different role to play out in their interaction with man.   

The Father, Son and Holy Spirit do not work on their own but in unity.

Hope these examples help.

equal components-

husband and wife in a marriage, both are people, both hpoefully have equal duties in the family, yet there has to be a head of the household.

There could be chaos if no one can have the deciding vote.

Have you ever been on a committee- number of separate members with equal votes, yet there is always a chair to conduct the meeting, keeping things flowing without it stalling on an issue.  The chair has the final say.

believer wrote: Hope these examples help. equal components- husband and wife in a marriage, both are people, both hpoefully have equal duties in the family, yet there has to be a head of the household. There could be chaos if no one can have the deciding vote. Have you ever been on a committee- number of separate members with equal votes, yet there is always a chair to conduct the meeting, keeping things flowing without it stalling on an issue.  The chair has the final say.

Negative. This is a poor analogy to support your defense of unity. a husband and wife are NOT equal because of  pre-conditioned roles. One may have more duties than the other or may be more supportive economically than the other, these elements are not called equality. Support for one another may be called unity because things are done in unison and are not unbalanced in this respect. But this is a stark difference than calling these two things equal. the reason the Trinity fails in this analogy is because, as Arius pointed out so many years back one is subserviant to the other. The Trinitarian concept is nothing more than a hylomorphic compound of an Aristotilian idea.

For example:

The Father is the Son and the Holy Spirit

Yet

Is NOT the Son and Holy Spirit.

The reason the Father is NOT the Holy Spirit or Son is that there is a quality that distinguishes it from Son and Holy Spirit otherwise the Father wouldn't be called 'Father' but would be called something else or perhaps Holy Spirit or Son. The reason why we name thing sis to create distinctions or categories of things. The Trinity cannot be equal if there is a compound that distinguishes one from the other even if the Trinitarian concept is thought to act out in unision. Even if such is true things that act in Unison are not ONE. For instance sychronize swimming is done in unison to create a beautific and yet difficult pattern of swimming yet, there are particulars in this pattern. Each swimmer must correspond with the other but they are all different individually (when looked at) the only thing that makes them ONE so to speak is their ability to act in unison with each other, but this takes practice. However this is ahrdly a defense or discredit of Trinitarian concept. I'm merely stating how action if done in unison does not equal it to it being one being.