You can’t put out an unqualified title of “God” without implying the full Trinitarian Godhead to the average Christian.
This statement does not show much confidence in the average Christian having a good understanding of the Trinity.
.
>> “This statement does not show much confidence in the average Christian having a good understanding of the Trinity.” <<
.
The “Trinity” is something from the mind of man. It is not found anywhere in scripture.
The phrase “the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” was not in any of the original writings of the NT, but was added in centuries after the original writings.
Luke’s original Acts of the Apostles said only “in the name of Yeshua.”
All that we do must be done in the name of Yeshua, or we have no authority to do it. It was Yeshua that paid the price, and opened the door to the Father, and sent his Holy Spirit to us to comfort us.
If the Father wanted us to babble about a “Trinity” he would have told us to do so in his word. The fact that he didn’t says volumes about this feckless diversion from the word.
Springfield is correct, that the word “God” implies all of the essence of “Elohim.” The power of “God” is the power of the Father. The power to judge was given by the Father to the Son. The Son sent us his Holy Spirit. These are what we need to know, and thus are all we are given to know.
Paul indicates that someday we will know more, but we will have to wait until we “know as we are known.”
.
Considering how "poorly catechized" FRoman Catholic elitists claim that everyone but them is, that is hardly a surprise.
Besides, have you seen dan's stats on how the average Catholic comes into alignment with RCC yteachings?