The problem is the people who have made this claim to me are both notoriously incompetent and openly dishonest.
I suspect they don't even understand the argument they attempt to prove.
The claim goes like this more specifically:
All classically monotheistic Gods will ultimately reduce to one thing or many things.
If they are one thing the all distinction is a illusion, if they are many ultimately then unity doesn't exist.
The trinity is immune to this problem because the trinity says God is both ultimately one and many
I have researched the origin of such claims and it apparently this goes back to Cornelius Van Till.
Below are my immediate concerns:
1. Its unclear how the trinity solves the problem of the one and the many as simply saying God is both one and many doesn't explain how that state of affairs can be the case. The problem of the one and the many is simple "How can things be related but different to each other?" so it seems that solving the one and the many with the trinity would require to explain why the trinity is the way it is.
2. It seems that if the one and the many was solvable by just claiming the foundation of the universe was fundamentally one and many then we would see more people of various worldviews attempting to say this. This makes me suspect there is some horrible side effect to claiming "both" as a answer.
3. Claiming that God is ultimately one and many seems like its violates the law of the excluded middle, since it seems like by "ultimately one or many" they mean "How many things are identical with God" .
Does anyone know if my concerns are well founded?