That is not an orthodox Christian source of any type, as evidenced by its attack on Orthodox, Catholic and most Protestant churches; its ontological and theological confusion and misrepresentations concerning the distinction between the "Who" and the "What" of God's Divine Nature, its rewriting of the history of the Christian Church, and its complete lack of sourcing for any of its misrepresentations of said history.
Ha.. I didn't know we had to go for the Orthodox vote. It was just convenient. I did find it a bit odd that he was going to some of the places he did, as I am not used to seeing that from a Christian. But, his phraseology and obvious Christian reverence put him more in your camp than mine.
I agree with what this fellow wrote and most of his citations and statistics are pretty plain being direct from old and new testament sources. To me all of these arguments are familiar but I liked that they were all in the same place to give you a single link. If we want to challenge the statistics he presents on the incidence of the usage of Echad, that could be legitimate, but I am pretty sure this is the correct number. Feel free to write him and do this. But, I feel no obligation to attempt to use the twistings and turnings of apologists to disprove themselves. Christians and Jews have a very different view of history, and this fellow believes as I do that the Council of Nicaea made a grave error when they attempted the Trinity to elevate Jesus to Godhood. This is a pat Jewish position, don't be shocked when a Jew takes it. If we believed otherwise, there wouldn't be any Jews.
Honestly, this is a frequent Christian practice, to attempt to inject what isn't there and to argue that the Torah supports Christianity by implication, while distorting all that is there. My daughter is taking a course on the Tanakh (they call it the Old Testament) at a Christian school and she was shocked to have to deal with claims that the Angel who came to Abraham to stop him from sacrificing Issac was Jesus. I mean, come on. But, that sort of thing is built on the very same sort of sand that you are attempting to build this wild redefinition of Echad. Perhaps you believe in a living Constitution as well.
A strong argument could be made that Rabbinic Judaism is equally unfounded in Torah and this very argument was made by the Sadducees all those many years ago, and revisited by the Karalites. The Scholars claimed that the Oral Torah was passed from Moses via the Prophets and Scholars around the Priests and only codified under the most dire circumstances when the whole of the Jewish Rabbinate was on the edge of oblivion following the Bar Kochba rebellion.
This understanding of God is not something that is far away, it is not something that only one person possesses to share. The understanding of God that Jews claim is what it is, it may not by your understanding, but I just think it is lame of you to attempt to characterize that understanding as anything but what it is, whether that supports your position or not.
Nevertheless, ultimately millions of Jews have died, many in agony in supplication and humility that there is but one God who holds our lives in his hands to do as he will, and any other stance is a rejection of the Commands to not worship idols and not to accept any God or God figure that stands between or before the Almighty instead of the one and only Almighty Source of all. Rabbi Akiba dying under the Roman flail prayed this very prayer, "Shema Israel, Adonai Eloheinu, Adonai Echad." And I assure you, he wasn't implying a Triune Godhead at the time. Make of it what you will, to a Jew, Echad still means One.
The same souls who adhere to caterpillian subjectivity with regard even to the most fundamental meanings of the simplest words scream:
As they redefine.