This is some more material which exposes the false nature of the alleged Trinity.

Believers in the Trinity, I urge you to repent and to follow true monotheism. God is One.

The title of the OP is "The triinity is invalid." What does that mean?

If there is a reasonable attack against the modern doctrine of consubstantial Trinity in the mess that is the OP, I cannot see it.

The title of the OP is "The triinity is invalid." What does that mean? — tim wood

The Trinity is not valid.

If there is a reasonable attack against the modern doctrine of consubstantial Trinity in the mess that is the OP, I cannot see it. — Akanthinos

Go through the material. They explain it better than I can. Are people interested in examination and research and the truth or no?

Go through the material. They explain it better than I can. Are people interested in examination and research and the truth or no? — Ram

No, this is a discussion forum, not a XYZtube platform. Show me you did the work and that there's something to engage before I bother to do so, otherwise it's just flamebait.

No, this is a discussion forum, not a XYZtube platform. Show me you did the work and that there's something to engage before I bother to do so, otherwise it's just flamebait. — Akanthinos

Okay, if you don't want to examine the evidence, you don't want to examine the evidence. It is what it is.

The Trinity is not valid. — Ram

In what sense? In what way is it not valid? What in this context does "valid" mean.

In what sense? In what way is it not valid? What in this context does "valid" mean. — tim wood

It's unsound. It doesn't add up. I'm not a dictionary.

This works:

val·id
ˈvaləd/Submit
adjective
(of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent.

It's unsound. It doesn't add up. I'm not a dictionary.
This works:
val·id
ˈvaləd/Submit
adjective
(of an argument or point) having a sound basis in logic or fact; reasonable or cogent. — Ram

Cogent within its context.

If you're talking about the Christian trinity (I know of no other), then be advised that real Christians never assert the tenets of their faith as facts, but rather preface their expressions of that faith with the words, "We believe." Arguing that any aspect of that faith - or any other so founded, even yours - is illogical or not factual is a red herring chasing a straw man. An irrelevancy against an irrelevancy. And I suspect you actually know better, so shame on you.

If you're talking about the Christian trinity (I know of no other), then be advised that real Christians never assert the tenets of their faith as facts, but rather preface their expressions of that faith with the words, "We believe." Arguing that any aspect of that faith - or any other so founded, even yours - is illogical or not factual is a red herring chasing a straw man. An irrelevancy against an irrelevancy. And I suspect you actually know better, so shame on you. — tim wood

Well if they don't believe their faith is factual then they aren't very Christian.

The Trinity is a Sacred Mystery. Almost every Catholic in existence would agree that it doesn't make much sense. But we also would not bust a vein over it, since it was always rather well articulated that the Divine Persons are relational.

"The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers a definitive dogma of the Trinity, a dogma that has been
handed down throughout the centuries of Christianity. Three doctrines or teachings express the reality
of the dogma of the Trinity: (1) the Trinity is One, (2) the divine persons are really distinct from one
another, and (3) the divine persons exist relative to one another.
The Trinity Is One. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “We do not confess three Gods,
but one God in three Persons, the ‘consubstantial Trinity.’ The Divine Persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: ‘The Father is that which the Son
is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e., by nature
one God.’ In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215): ‘Each of the persons is that supreme
reality, viz., the divine substance, essence, or nature.’”xii Therefore, the Trinity is one God: “The Father
is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God,” as stated in the Athanasius Creed (ca. AD 350).
The three Persons are all co-eternal and co-equal and are all uncreated and omnipotent."

- https://www.smp.org/dynamicmedia/files/aceafa5e6fa80c7efe142f4750d0798c/TX001181_1-Background-The_Trinity.pdf

The Trinity is a Sacred Mystery. Almost every Catholic in existence would agree that it doesn't make much sense. But we also would not bust a vein over it, since it was always rather well articulated that the Divine Persons are relational.

"The Catechism of the Catholic Church offers a definitive dogma of the Trinity, a dogma that has been
handed down throughout the centuries of Christianity. Three doctrines or teachings express the reality
of the dogma of the Trinity: (1) the Trinity is One, (2) the divine persons are really distinct from one
another, and (3) the divine persons exist relative to one another.
The Trinity Is One. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “We do not confess three Gods,
but one God in three Persons, the ‘consubstantial Trinity.’ The Divine Persons do not share the one divinity among themselves but each of them is God whole and entire: ‘The Father is that which the Son
is, the Son that which the Father is, the Father and the Son that which the Holy Spirit is, i.e., by nature
one God.’ In the words of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215): ‘Each of the persons is that supreme
reality, viz., the divine substance, essence, or nature.’”xii Therefore, the Trinity is one God: “The Father
is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God,” as stated in the Athanasius Creed (ca. AD 350).
The three Persons are all co-eternal and co-equal and are all uncreated and omnipotent." — Akanthinos

You are a Catholic?

Raised as one, in all-males boarding schools with nuns and all!
Faith never took root, tho.

Well if they don't believe their faith is factual then they aren't very Christian. — Ram

Which makes clear you have not the slightest idea what you're talking about.

Which makes clear you have not the slightest idea what you're talking about. — tim wood

Hopefully you find something more interesting than semantics to argue about. But yes whether God exists or not is a matter of fact. Either that God exists is a fact or that He doesn't exist is a fact (the former is correct). Just because we can't see God doesn't mean the matter is not one of fact and I'm sure many Christians would like to say that the Bible says are facts.

Christians would like to say that the Bible says are facts. — Ram

Actually, Christians - above I think I qualified that as real Christians - don't. If you meet self-proclaimed Christians who do, they aren't.

Not everyone correctly distinguishes between belief and fact. Peel those you speak to back a bit, and they should correctly revert to belief. If they don't, they're 1) ignorant, 2) not Christians, or 3) at best part Christians. Some fundamentalists fall into this latter category.

But this isn't up for debate, it's simply the fact of the matter. Move on.

Actually, Christians - above I think I qualified that as real Christians - don't. If you meet self-proclaimed Christians who do, they aren't.

Not everyone correctly distinguishes between belief and fact. Peel those you speak to back a bit, and they should correctly revert to belief. If they don't, they're 1) ignorant, 2) not Christians, or 3) at best part Christians. Some fundamentalists fall into this latter category.

But this isn't up for debate, it's simply the fact of the matter. Move on. — tim wood

Maybe your idea of "real Christians" are liberal "Christians". Real Christians certainly believe their faith is factual.

Maybe your idea of "real Christians" are liberal "Christians". Real Christians certainly believe their faith is factual. — Ram

Apparently the Church is not made of "real Christians".

Indeed, the trinity is nonsense. But that does not mean Islam is correct.

I'm closing this thread. If the OP cannot be bothered to articulate its own arguments and instead demands that others simply refer to a series of videos, then that, coupled with the unwarranted combative tone, makes for a poor space for discussion. Provide arguments which can be debated over, not videos.