evangelist-1 wrote:We have Scriptures saying that God manifested Himself as a man (1 Tim 3:16, 1 John 1:2).
I.E. Jesus was one Manifestation of God ... Sorry.
Those Scriptures do not say God manifested Himself as a man. They say JESUS, AS (to use our terms) THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY, was manifested as a man. And that difference is the whole debate: Does God have three Persons or one Person, which Person was manifested in three different ways. Since we believe that Jesus existed prior to His incarnation, it is totally Trinitarian to say He (Jesus) was manifested in the flesh. But that does not address the orthodoxy/heresy point, i.e., it does not lend support for the view that God has only one Person and that One Person can manifest Himself three ways, including as Jesus.
Why do I say the texts don’t say “God” was manifested in the flesh? I John 1:2 clearly—on its face—is distinguishing between the Father and the Son. I Timothy 3:16 is a little more complicated, but only because some manuscripts have the word “God” at the critical point. However, based on textual analysis, the best and most attested tests show that the word is “which/who/he,” and indeed the ESV, which you cited, has “He.” He, in context, and even more so when read in light of the rest of the Bible, indicates that “He” is Jesus, not God, “undifferentiatedly.”
I’m not sure which part of all this you think is ridiculous, but if that is a reference to the labor the Church has put into hashing out such critical issues for centuries, I disagree. Elsewhere on these boards there is a thread about essential vs. non-essentials. Surely the Trinity (as opposed to competing views) is on the essentials side of that line.