Comment: "You are the one who claims

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Hey (see in situ)

"You are the one who claims

"You are the one who claims to know how God works..."

I didn't say that I fully know how the trinity works, I said I don't see mutually exclusive concepts in the trinity. I have no reason to believe an attribution of a logical paradox is justified. You are saying God operates with inconsistency, so in a way it seems you are claiming to know how God works more than me. I say I find no inconsistency, but you affirm it's there, because you think you know enough about God to attribute it to him. a paradox is not the idea that you don't know something works, a paradox is when inconsistency is demonstrably 'known' to be inconsistency, when there is no doubt about the illogical nature of something. You seem to have no Doubts about God's being in this subject, you assert it is illogical. If God is not the author of confusion, how can you say that his very being is confusion, illogical, inconsistent, a paradox? Could it be at least possible to you that maybe your interpretation method is the thing that is lacking logical congruity rather than God's being?