Christians

[Ryft]

Nobody really understands it.

Please do not impose your ignorance on everybody else. You do not understand it; others likewise do not, even here at these forums. But myself and many others understand it just fine, which renders your ignorance being imposed upon us a brutal non-sequitur.

So three separate persons can't be separate from each other?

That is precisely the opposite of what I said. Reading comprehension fail. Each member of the Trinity is a person distinct from the others.

Jesus is a separate person from Yahweh but can't be separate? I'm so glad you cleared that up.

And another reading comprehension fail, again the complete opposite of what I said. Jesus is not a separate person from Yahweh; he IS Yahweh.

Your ability to complicate the trinitarian view does not make it complicated. There is a pattern emerging in these responses against the trinitarian view, including yours: there are some who change the meaning of words in order to suit an argument, in this case polytheism, and others who invert trinitarian statements into their complete opposite in order to suit an argument, like you are doing. All of it is transparently dishonest. Rhetorically delightful and elicits back-slaps and cheers from the choir, but transparently dishonest.

So he's a distinct being with a different will but part of the same god and therefore the same being but they're separate and distinct but not?

There are so many things wrong in this nonsensical straw man that I scarcely know where to begin, aside from pointing out that it is a nonsensical straw man; that is to say, your statement represents nothing recognizable to orthodox Christian teaching, fails to correspond with anything orthodox Christianity teaches, and is not even coherent in the first place. A triple fail.

Do you want to try again, this time rationally and with intellectual integrity? Or are you content with that straw man nonsense, leaving the trinitarian view untouched?

Roughly half the epistles of Paul are of dubious authenticity. Titus is one of the dubious epistles.

Irrelevant to the point being argued (ignoratio elenchi).

There was no orthodox Christianity prior to Nicaea ... [snip rest]

Irrelevant. We are not living either before or near the time of Nicea, but in fact over sixteen hundred years afterward. My point stands firm: the scriptures, ancient creeds, liturgies, systematics and so forth (across nineteen hundred years) all confirm that orthodox Christianity has never taught three separate gods. The Marcionites, Ebionites, and Arians were all denounced as heretical each in their time by the Christian church through scriptural appeal and, in such cases as Arianism, gave rise to creedal formulations. This orthodox Christianity is what we find in the scriptures, creeds, etc., and the reason why such teachings as that of Arius are called Arianism.

---

---

Okay, so God is not three gods. He's three 'persons'. Well that clears it up, then: God is schizophrenic.

Only if God is a person who is three persons—which is rejected by trinitarian Christianity.