That's an oversimplification and not charitable. Trinitarians are perfectly capable of defending the doctrine without making stupid mistakes. I wouldn't call the doctrine "incomprehensible"; it's just beyond human understanding, in a way that we could contemplate it for the rest of eternity without reaching the fullness of what God has planted in that seed of knowledge.
It's easy to believe in the Trinity if you approach it as a little child, as Jesus encourages, and if we word it simply as the Fathers did. If we don't attempt to adorn it with our own analogies or explanations, it's elegant, simple, and transcendent.
> I wouldn't call the doctrine "incomprehensible"; it's just beyond human understanding, in a way that we could contemplate it for the rest of eternity without reaching the fullness of what God has planted in that seed of knowledge.
I am trying but failing to see the difference here. It sounds like what you're saying is, "I wouldn't call the doctrine incomprehensible, it's just that we (as humans) can't comprehend it"
> It's easy to believe in the Trinity if you approach it as a little child, as Jesus encourages, and if we word it simply as the Fathers did.
If you approach it as a little child, it's also very easy to believe in Santa Claus, but that doesn't make it any more true (or any more likely to be true either).
It's easy to believe in the Trinity if you approach it as a little child, as Jesus encourages, and if we word it simply as the Fathers did. If we don't attempt to adorn it with our own analogies or explanations, it's elegant, simple, and transcendent.