Reddit mentions of One God, One Lord (T&T Clark Cornerstones)

> …the several major investigations of Simon Magus traditions
show that almost every question associated with this figure remains open.
It appears that there may have been some sort of cultic veneration of
Simon in second-century circles, but claims that such veneration of
Simon characterized a first-century following and that such a group is
indicative of Samaritan spirituality must be treated as speculative.

• One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism

I'm not sure if you were trying to respond to me, but I'll reply nonetheless.

Tertullian and Justin Martyr were not trinitarians in any orthodox sense of the term. Tertullian believed in a two-stage logos theory, whereas Justin probably believed in a one-stage theory (if I recall correctly). Take a look here. They were both subordinationists, as was common in the 1st and 2nd century. They believed that the son was of an inferior and a derived nature with respect to the Father. They also emphasized the uniqueness of the Father when then were challenged about their monotheism.

Whether Jesus is called God in Romans 9:5 is controversial. This verse far from settles the matter in favor of trinitarianism in Paul. Here are two translations which differ:

RSV
> to them belong the patriarchs, and of their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ. God who is over all be blessed forever. Amen

Moffatt
>the patriarchs are theirs, and theirs too (so far as natural descent goes) is the Christ. (Blessed for evermore be the God who is over all! Amen.)

Here is a brief article defending these interpretations.

On the other hand, the author of Hebrews and perhaps the author of John felt comfortable applying the term "god" to Jesus in certain contexts. Whether they thought Jesus was identical to the monotheistic deity is a different question, and likely not the case given how these authors differentiated Jesus and God (see for example John 17:3).

You write:
> Even prior to the Nicene creed, we have writings dating from the NT through the centuries up to it and afterward when persons clearly called these three Persons the one God.

What writings do you have in mind here? The view that the one God just is the three persons together is a statement of orthodox trinitarianism, which you certainly don't find articiculated in the New Testament. If there existed such a passage, the issue of the trinity would hardly have ever been controversial. Personally, I haven't found anyone who thought this prior to 381; And even then, you need to wait until Augustine to see it clearly.

What Paul intended to express vis a vis the Shema in 1 Corinthians 8:6 is also controversial. Some scholars such as NT Wright have recently argued that Paul is inserting Jesus into the Shema; saying that the one God of Israel is the Father and Jesus together. At most this is binitarianism, since it lacks any mention of the spirit. However, when thinking about this, it's important to keep in mind that historically this verse has never been regarded as an important Christological text. Presumably, previous readers assumed that Paul was simply asserting that Christians have one lord (or ruler) in addition to having one God, who is also a lord (or ruler) in a different capacity. So, the subtlety that Wright is picking up on was lost on everyone before him, evidently. In any case, use of language in this verse is tricky. James McGrath argues against NT Wright here.

For further reading, I recommend Larry Hurtado's book on early Christian devotional practices. He explores the Old Testament themes that the early church drew upon to understand Jesus. He argues that while they spoke of Jesus in uniquely exalted terms, they were nevertheless careful to distinguish Jesus from God (a theme which is illustrated in Philippians 2). The understanding of the church, according to Hurtado, in the first few decades was that while there was a close association between Jesus and God, there was not numerical identity. In other words Jesus and God were two things to them; two separate objects of worship — not one and the same object. Hurtado suggests that the early Christian community (which was Jewish, no less) simply did not see this practice as in conflict with their monotheism. This tension was picked up on later. It was what inspired centuries of Christological speculation, which eventually led to a formulation of the doctrine of the trinity.

Larry Hurtado has already dispatched Ehrman's shoddy scholarship on this subject.