The Holy Trinity

I am still not sure what I am to be denying here. He is affirming there is a Trinity and so far he as only offered definitions and not proof. He has defined the trinity, but has not proved the Trinity. I have somewhat of an issue with his definition though. In answer to Q-1 he correct defines the doctrine of the Trinity as three distinct persons. Then in answer to Q-3 and he defines person as modes. If these persons are not being, but simply modes then he is espousing modalism. I don't have lot of issue with the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit as modes. But the fact of the matter is Trinitaraian view the Father, Son, & Holy Spirit as more than modes. If pressed I am sure that he would say that the FS&H are more than modes, but rational beings. The Father is a being, the Son is a being, the Holy Spirit is a being in his view. They are three separate Divine persons. He states in answer to Q-3 that there are three subtances in the Godhead. MY OPPONENT: "Any one of the three substances or modes of the Holy Trinity." This demonstrates my opponent lack of understanding of his on doctrine. There are not reputable sources that define the Trinity as three substances. Notice the follwing definition of the Trinity as beind ONE substance. "that the one God exists in three Persons and one substance, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Oxford University Press 2005 ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3). & http://en.wikipedia.org... In attempting to answer Q-4 he just ignores it. I still want an answer to the Question, who does John say is the only true God. I want more than a Dan Story quote defining the Trinity. I am well aware of the definition of the Trinity. Please read the veres and answer the question. Who does John 17:3 say is the only true God? He then states, "My answer to your first question does not suggest that I believe in three gods (polytheism)." This seems really illogical in light of his combined answers 1, 4, & 5. In question 5 he states, "Yes. The Father is God. The Son is God. The Holy Spirit is God." He also argues that they are separte persons, in 1 & 4. In his view the Father is 100% God and is a separater person from the son who is 100% God and both of those persons are separate persons from a third who is also 100% God. If that is not three God's I don't know how to explain what is. Oh, he will say, because the share the same nature (See Dan Story from Q-4). This is often the argument, the reason why three separate persons can be one God is because they share the same nature. Let look at is like this. If you can worship three separate persons and them be one God because they share the same divine nature, I wonder if one could obey 1 Tim 3:2 and be married to three separate person who all share the human nature and have one wife? You see he believe in three separate persons with their own existence and somehow this is all one God. This is at best mild polytheism. It sure is not monotheism. That is the reason that no Jew, the original monotheist, accepts the doctrine of the Trinity. They understand it for what it is. Here is the point. If you have three separate persons and all of them are Governors, you have three Governors. Trinitarianism differs in no way numerically from polytheism. I am sure that we will go much deeper in this befre this debate is all over. I will cease with the argumentation for now since my affirmative as offer no proof of the Trinity, especially Biblical, but only definitions. You must do more than offer definitions, but proof. A doctrine defined is not a doctrine proved!!!! I will be glad when this is over to debate from the affimative my view on the Godhead as a oneness pentecostal. If you would kindly accept.