Great feedback, Tom.
I’m trying to strike a balance of instruction, inspiration, and avoidance of common philosophical traps.
You have a great idea with clearly implying monotheism in the first phrase. I’ll begin with “I believe in one God.” Also, my partnership model of the trinity is too complex for a statement like this, so I’ll scratch that.
I avoided the terms almighty and omnipotence because they get philosophical flack. For example, God cannot make an unbending stick that he cannot bend. Alternatively, maximal power is a theological term that means “most possible power” while avoiding the “almighty” philosophical trap. I like the alliteration of “perfect power” while perfect/flawless power might not be the most possible power, so I’ll stick with “maximal power” as vague as it might be to many people.
I like the instructional value in the phrase knowledge of all possibilities, so I’ll stick with that.
I agree that love implies justice, but that’s unclear to many people. Many people need to see the juxtaposition of “love” and “justice,” so I’ll stick with that.
I like your idea of using two paragraphs to separate the core original attributes of God from the the statement about God’s relationship to creation. That makes two one-sentence paragraphs, but that’s okay for a creed.
This edits to:
*I believe in one God, the only uncreated, always existing with maximal power, knowledge of all possibilities, unlimited love, justice, and as three equal persons of one indivisible divine nature.
I believe God made all creation and revealed the three divine persons as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
I believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Christ remained fully divine while becoming fully human. He ministered teaching, prophecy, and miracles. He died on a cross for our salvation from sin, resurrected from the dead, ascended to the heavenly dimensions, and poured out the Holy Spirit while establishing the church of saints. He will return, judge the living and the dead, and fully establish his glorious kingdom on earth.*
theoperspectives.blogspot.com/20 … lieve.html
Traditionalist who believe in inscrutable simple foreknowledge can also affirm this creed. But the more I think about it, I see inscrutable simple foreknowledge as less and less relevant, even if I could never absolutely disprove it.
I also avoid the traditionalist “eternal generation of the son,” which I strongly doubt. For example, I see the Bible teaching that the declaration of Christ’s Sonship relates to creation, the incarnation, and the resurrection.