Analyzing trinity PT. 2. Philosophical

Assalamualaikum readers!
Time to get into part 2 of analyzing trinity. This time, we will be analyzing the trinity from a philosophical aspect to prove there are several problems with it.
What is trinity?
In my previous article, analyzing trinity part 1, I discussed the logical problem of the trinity. Before I did that, I gave a definition of the trinity, and I will repeat that practice for this article, and the finale of the series.
The trinity is the doctrine that states that God, being 1 being, or essence, exists in 3 distinct persons, being the father, the son, and the holy spirit. Said persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and independent.
Philosofical reason for trinitarianism:
From a philosofical angle, we know that there cannot be more than 1 God. We know that God must be omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal. However, we believe that everything about God is exactly the way it is for a specific reason. This leads me to my first issue. We know that there are a number of reasons why there has to be only 1 God, however there is no philosophical reason why God has to be 3 distinct persons, yet 1 God. One would think that if there was any reason for why God has to be 3 persons but 1 God, he would have revealed it to us. However, there is no reason we can deduce why the trinitarian concept of God has to be the way he is.
Argument from necessary being:
Christians and muslims both believe in a necessary being. The definition of a necessary being is a being which possesses attributes necessary for the creation of the universe, such as omnipotents, omniscients, etc. Its important to establish that there cannot be more than 1 necessary being. The reason being is that having more than 1 necessary being makes 1 of them unnecessary by default, and not God.
The trinitarian belief posits that each of the 3 persons of God, being father, son and holy spirit, share the same essence, and therefore share the same attributes. If that were true, it would by default make 2 of the persons unnecessary.
Same attributes:
A deeper look into the idea that each distinct person of the trinity shares the same attributes reveals more problems for the doctrine. Are there any attributes that 1 person has and the other ones don’t? Well, but of course!
Eternally begotten:
The doctrine of the trinity, as articulated in the orthodox view, states that the son and the spirit were eternally begotten by the father. In other words, the son and the spirit eternally proceeded forth from the father, which is an attribute that the father doesn’t share with the son and the spirit. This also contradicts with the independence of the son and the spirit, as to be independent means to not rely on anyone else.
Elevation of divine persons:
The orthodox view on the trinity states that the father alone has the power to cause other divine persons to exist. if the persons of the trinity shared the same essence, they should have the same power. The fact that they don’t creates a huge issue.
Christ’s dependence:
Another issue with the trinity comes in the form of a question. Is christ dependent, or independent, of God the father? You can also substitute christ with the spirit and this will work just fine. However, we will be sticking with the person of the son for this example. If the answer is yes, than as stated earlier, Christ could not have been eternally begotten from the father, as that in and of itself contradicts with the state of independence. Furthermore, if the answer is yes, this would mean that there are 2 alternate independent existences, therefore 2 gods. If the answer is no, then Christ cannot be God, as to be God means to be completely independent.
The will distinction:
Another problem from a philosofical standpoint is the problem of wills. The problem, like the previous one, is in the form of a question. The question becomes, do the three persons of the trinity have one will? Or 3. If they have all one will, and one essense, we ask what is the distinction between the persons. Are there any atributes which make them distinct from each other? If they all have their own will, then we would see imbalance within the universe, as one could enact his will in one particular area of the universe, whereas another person of the trinity can completely contradict that. However, since this is not the case, we can only come to two conclusions. The first is that one of the persons of the trinity is overriding the other persons, enacting his will and overpowering the others. The second is that the persons of the trinity are compramising with each other, thereby disqualifying them from being God, as to be God means to be 100 percent independant.
A potential argument for the philosophical necessity of the trinity:
One Christian may say that the philosophical necessity of the trinity comes in the form of God’s attributes. The argument is articulated in the following way. We know from the bible that God is loving. However, in order for God to be loving, he must have someone to love. If he loved us humans after creating us, this shows that his attributes are independent on us, and therefore God is in a way dependant on us. Because of this, there has to be something which God exercizes his love to, from eternity past, otherwise God isn’t loving.
The problem with this argument is that it undermines God’s other attributes. God is all forgiving, Daniel 9:9, gets angry, Geremiah 17:4, hates, psalms 11:5, creates, genesis 1:1, shows mercy, exitus 34:5-7, is jealous, exitus 34:14, exitus 20:4-5, and casts judgement, malachi 3:5-6, Rev. 11:18-19, romans 1:18-20.
Does this in turn mean that God also needs to eternally excersize those attributes to someone else in the godhead? For instance, does this mean that one of the persons of the godhead will have to continuously sin so that another can continuously exercize his forgiveness? Of course not.
Conclusion:
Philosophically, the doctrine of the trinity is incredibly problematic. When scrutinizing the trinity from a philosophical standpoint, we find numerous irreconcilable issues with the idea that God can be 3 distinct persons, and yet 1 being, or essence. In islam, there is no such philosophical issue. The concept of God’s oneness has more logical and philosophical backing than any other concept. It is easy to understand, is perfectly in line with our God-given logic and rationality, and untouched when dissected from a purely philosophical perspective.