Christians

[DeistPaladin]

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.

Wow! You understand the Trinity? You've solved the mystery that no Christian "scholar" has ever unlocked? Are we in the presence of legendary genius? Let's hear it then. The world is waiting.

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

You know, Ryft, when someone strawmans me, I usually post what I actually said as part of the correction. So, let's go to the tape again.

If God is in three separate persons, as trinitarianism teaches, then Jesus cannot be a separate being from Yahweh;

Sure looks like you said there are three separate persons but they're not separate from each other.

Jesus is not a separate person from Yahweh; he IS Yahweh.

So to review:

three separate persons

and

not a separate person

So glad you're around to explain this stuff.

All of it is transparently dishonest. Rhetorically delightful and elicits back-slaps and cheers from the choir, but transparently dishonest.

I can always rely on you to overload my irony meter, Ryft. First you accuse us of "mental gymnastics" while defending the Trinity and then you, a Christian apologist, accuse me of dishonesty. A psychology student could use you as a classic case of one who uses the defense mechanism projection.

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.

It's called "ridicule".

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?

I think the ball is still in your court to explain what the Trinity is with no self-contradiction this time, never mind in a way that is consistent with all canonical Gospel accounts.

Irrelevant to the point being argued (ignoratio elenchi).

Seeing as how you cited Titus, I don't think the fact that it's quite possibly pseudo-epigraphical is irrelevant.