Three co-eternal, coequal, consubstantial persons within the one being that is God, is what the doctrine of the Trinity states. That is a quick summation of the historical, orthodox definition of the Trinity.
Of course doing that is wrong, but, I am absolutely not doing that.
Of course. And, there is nothing stated about the distinctions here.
The same answer.
It isn't speaking of God negatively, no more than saying God is not tripartite is speaking of God negatively; it's just stating a fact about God. Saying that the Father is not the Son is similar, although not identical, to saying that every father is not their own son. It maintains the distinction between the persons, as is logical, common sense, and biblical.
I haven't added a single thing to Scripture. I am saying the very same things the Bible says, just in a different way. There is always more than one way to say something, right? I'm not blaming anyone for anything.
I am correct in stating that if a person believes that God is a single person, an absolute unity, then they cannot, by definition, as I've given above, be a Trinitarian. The Trinity is defined the way it is, and to reject that is to be something other than Trinitarian. That should go without saying because it is obvious. That's why words and concepts have definitions, so we know what we are and are not talking about. It would be like someone rejecting the deity of Jesus and claiming to be a Trinitarian. It just doesn't work because that goes against the very definition.