Can the Trinity be philosophically reconciled with monotheism?

Question:  “Can the Trinity be philosophically reconciled with monotheism?”
 
Answer: Yes, it most certainly can. First of all, we must understand that the essence of God is thorough throughout Godhead. In response to a similar question, Dr. William Lane Craig refers to the essence of God as the soul of God; which more properly, I believe, describes the functional principle through which God functions. More precisely, ontologically God is one; whereas functionally God is a trinity of internal person-hoods which are appropriately named the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This functionality or inner relationship, in my opinion, is more properly called the economy of God (from the Greek oikonomikos, meaning how one conducts his affairs). Or for brevity we simply refer to this as the economic trinity since the concept covers God's inner relationships within the trinity of persons, as well as, God's work in and through his creation. This we may also think of as the praxis of God.

Some object, as it appears Dr. Craig does, to the use of the term economic trinity as it relates to the pristine ontology of God himself—which they say promotes subordinationalism, internally within the essence or nature of God. However, orthodox theology, I believe, has long since dismiss this objection by asserting that any such subordination is voluntary, and therefore, rather a function of the will than of the nature of God. 

These concepts, admittedly, are hard to wrap one’s mind around, as, of course, one would expect since we are talking about God here who can only be understood by His functionality. However, when we say, “God is love,” we must account for a pristine Godly character prior to creation, otherwise the nature of God is inconsistent. Think about this, logically, to have love you must have a lover and a beloved; also, to have a Father you must have a Son, therefore, God in His perfection is both. To have both, however, one must assume a principle of functionality, which in my opinion is the work of the Holy Spirit without which God would be incomplete. 

Question: “Philosophically does the concept of the Trinity square with Scripture?”

Answer: Yes, of course. What is philosophically true is also confirmed as such by Scripture.
 
Question: “That being the case then, does that not call for an infallible and inerrant Scripture? Then there are other issues, incidents and events which can be demonstratively shown to be filled with several numerical and scientific contradictions?”

Answer: Other issues? Personally, I believe, Scripture can be trusted on these so-called "other issues". Scribal errors can be assigned to a majority of these "other issues" such as numerical contradictions, conflicting dates and/ or names of kings, and so-forth. I am not aware of any scientific mistakes that cannot be corrected either hermeneutically or through faith. 

Scripturally, biblical authors spoke and wrote just like any other non-scientific individual would—that being primarily phenomenologically. What appears, we all realize—particular in a pre-scientific age—is only a perception, what lies underneath may and usually does require a more detail analysis to satisfy the scientifically minded.

Joshua, for instance, felt that the sun stood still (Joshua 10) which, of course, is an incredible statement; however, we must consider that with God nothing is impossible. For example, scientifically, it is also impossible to explain how five loaves and two fish can feed over 5,000 thousand people as we see in Matthew 14; however, those present witness the miracle and reported it as such. Further, we may ask how did Jesus heal the blind, the crippled, and stop the issue of blood from a hemorrhaging woman who had suffered for twelve years with this horrible debilitating disease? The answer is, of course, that He performed a miracle in each case. This, however does not seem implausible since after all He did create the universe and all that is therein by simply speaking them into existence. Having said that, I am willing to listen to an alternative reason for the phenomenon. 
 
These things must be accepted by faith. But, to address your objection, none of these so-called errors are valid once the supremacy of His power is acknowledged. For as Scripture declares, “Nothing is impossible with God (Matthew 19:26).”

One closing word. It is not unreasonable to assume that with over 4,000 plus manuscripts which are copies of copies of copies of the original documents that at times numbers when juxtaposed do not agree. No Christian claims that these copies are without some possible alterations; however, the majority are in agreement. And, as in most things, the majority opinion holds, unless, of course, a substantial argument to the contrary is presented.