Yes, you simply say scripture is __________ to me.
In other words, I think a beginning to an answer was offered and your rejection of it was, well, hard to understand. Or maybe I didn't understand it.
This is a discussion where precision will matter, I think. Maybe it would help if you said what you meant by the value of Scripture. What sorts of value might it have? Of course, if the real purpose of the question is so that you can pounce on something or somebody and say, "See THERE? They ARE vicious apostates!" why don't you just go on ahead without me, okay?
It's also interesting and a matter of concern to me that the thread was started with a query about what the doctrine of the Trinity is. Whether it's a good doctrine, whether it's scripturally based, whether Catholics are a bunch of self-deluding and apostatic idolaters --- all these are different questions. I wonder if the original poster thinks the question was addressed. So much easier and more efficient to condemn something without taking the time to understand it.
It's like talking to atheists. They almost always start out by saying that they just want to understand and then end up by saying the If there is a God he's a jerk and they hate him and all those who believe in HIM are stupid, but I never feel like we agreed on who or what it is I so stupidly worship.
Similarly, some guy asks a question about the Trinity and, look out, here comes a bunch of people to say that Catholics and anybody who thinks for more than 5 seconds in a row about the doctrine, whatever it is, are just plain old doody-heads.
Whose mind will be changed, or even informed, by that kind of thing, I wonder. Excuse me, I have to go back to worshiping idols, burning heretics, selling indulgences and making up new burdens to bind on the people's backs now.