My understanding is that Christians are by definition trinitarians. The doctrine of the Trinity states that there is one divine being (nature), God, and three persons, each of which has the same divine nature. God is Triune. “I cannot think, says Gregory of Nazianzus, on the one without quickly being encircled by the splendor of the three; nor can I discern the three without being straightway carried back to the one.”
My question is: Are trinitarians in cahoots with cabalists? Here is the Cabala (Kabbalah):
“Regarding the distinction between monotheism, polytheism and pantheism, this distinction hardly exists for the Initiate. Verily there is little difference between a single God and a harmony of Supreme Forces, so absolutely linked that the effect would be that of an indivisible unit, a plurality whose action is unified, a unity whose action is pluralised.” (Cabala Unveiled)
Christians are certainly not in cahoots with cabalists. You may say, It sure looks like it. Let’s see. Compare:
“the one encircled by the splendor of the three; the three being straightway carried back to the one” (Christianity)”
“a plurality whose action is unified, an unity whose action is pluralised” (Cabala – we could include Eastern thought in general).
Now, just because both these descriptions share similar words does not imply they connote the same meanings. Three what, one what (Christianity), a plurality of what, a unity of what (Cabala). In other words, to what categories do these numeric adjectives refer? The Pharaoh, Akhnaton’ worshiped one God, does that mean that Akhnaton’s God is the same as Allah or as Yahweh, or that Allah is the same as Yahweh?
In Christianity, “one” refers to God’s Being/Nature/Essence, while three refers to “Persons.” If you’re Jewish or Muslim or a Gentile Unitarian, or just a plain old gentle atheist, you’d think this distinction between one divine nature and a plurality of divine persons makes no sense; the distinction would be logically incoherent. The Trinity for the Unitarian (one God equates with one person) is a doctrine, says Jacob Neusner, that does not “fit in place” because it imposes “stresses and strains on the [coherent] structure that encompasses [it].” (“Rabbinical theology: Language, system, structure.” Brill Academic Publishers, 2002, pp. 9-10). It cannot be a solution, Neusner would argue, because it posits more than one God. The Christian doctrine of the Trinity, of course, posits no such a thing.
Anti-trinitarians maintain that the Trinity is a post-biblical aberration concocted by Constantine – (if they’d only study history), a theological klutz – at the Council of Nicea. On the contrary, the trinity is based on sound biblical inferences. The Bible should be the Christian’s foundation and guide on this matter and on all matters.