the christian trinity is an illogical idea

Pro says "by this reasoning the son and the father should be considered two separate beings period. which would mean we have three gods as the godhead," but my reference to two humans would not imply separate beings in the case of God, only separate persons, for there is a difference between "being" and "person." We cannot assume that God's nature must be exactly like ours so that he cannot be tri-personal, that is, having more than one person in his being. He says "the flour analogy doesn't work. i see how both the components and the whole can be called flour. but that doesn't work with the trinity. to be analogous the son would be God but also part of God, part of the whole thing. this might be true linguistically but in practice has problems. the son would be a component if the flour anaology were true.... but theology says he is wholly God in himself. i know you said you are just using an inexact anaology, but you haven't shown how they can be three and one at the same time. (to be sure, to say something is three and one at the same time is on its face contradictory).' Pro misses the point here. A scoop of flour is not part of flour, its %100 flour. A scoop of flour is BY NATURE %100 flour. Its not partially flour just because its not the whole bag of flour. It being part of a larger mass doesn't mean its nature is different from the whole thing in any way. So the Son is part of the triune God, but is BY NATURE %100 God, that is %100 divine, wholly omniscient, omnipresent, eternal, etc. So just as a scoop of flour is part of the whole bag of flour and at the same time is fully BY NATURE "flour," having all the attributes of flour, Jesus is part of God (the triune being) while being fully God in the sense of having all the attributes (or the nature) of God. Pro says "if this were true we could simply say the son is part of God, he's a component. this is against christian theology. again it gets contradictory cause you are trying to say he's a component yet he's also the whole thing. like saying it's three and one at the same time." But Christians don't believe Jesus is the entire Trinity. Pro doesn't seem to get that we are using the word "God" in two different ways. Jesus is not God in the sense that He is the entire Trinity, but he is God in the sense that he is omniscient, all-knowing, all-loving, eternal, immutable, etc. In other words, He is God BY NATURE. He is FULLY God means that He has all of these attributes I have listed that makes God such a unique and awesome being. So Jesus is God in one sense, and a part of God in another sense. No contradiction here. Pro argues that "your quantum idea is interesting. but that only works at the quantum level and we are talking about someone who is a human." How does Pro know that it can only work at the quantum level? A quantum mircrophone, big enough for the eye to see, can vibrate an not vibrate at the same time. http://www.scientificamerican.com... Our knowledge, science and technology is improving. A God whose knowledge is literally infinite would be able to do much more beyond what our Science can do, and its not illogical to think that He could. Just because we don't know scientifically how to do it, doesn't imply God would not. An ant cannot comprehend how its possible for us to build a car, and the difference between us and God is much wider than the difference between us and an ant! The idea that someone with the amount of knowledge and power God has (limitless) would be able to get quantum effects on a large scale is not illogical. We didn't always know about gravity and radiation, but that didn't mean they didn't exist. Similarly, it would be illogical to think that because we don't know how God can get something done means that its unreasonable to think that He can. Pro is imagining that if the word God means the Trinity, that to say Jesus is God would mean that Jesus is the entire Trinity. Why, Pro, can't you accept that there is more than one meaning to the word God? The word "god" also means, simply, an object of worship, for example. And why did you not reply to the difference I gave between person and being? Also, if a man can have split personalities, and twins can be born joined together (two heads, two arms, but only three feet), why can't there be a God with three minds?