How can you say the use of "full-color pictures, nice layout, lots of quotes and citations" is "dangerous" when your unnecessarilylong dialogue between Dan and Mike is filled with illustrations and comparisons, some of which present a distorted view?
What I think is distorted are some of the denials you use. For example, there are three-headed gods among the ancient pagans, and non-trinitarians compare those three-headed gods with the Catholic and Protestant Trinity. But if, as you say, the God of the Bible is a Trinity, why in the Bible are there no hints of him having three heads? God is always spoken of as "He," never as "They".
The dialogue admits that church and pagan gods with three heads are similar, but you say the pagans were portraying three gods whereas the churches have only one God in mind. Then why does church artwork use such pagan representations? Why deny that the teaching is confusing, unreasonable and unscriptural? If Trinitarians worship only one God, why do they use illustrations that pagans employ to portray three gods? It would seem that Trinitarians bow before three gods, after all, and not the God who was worshipped as the one true God by the Jews. At John 4:22, Jesus said regarding himself and the Jews of his day, "You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews." Jesus our Savior worshiped, not a Trinity, but the same unitary God that all other godly Jews worshiped. (John 20:17)
FJTOTH, I think you need to interact with author of that article I pasted in LOL. I didn't write it, so I won't try to defend the length and style of it. These are not the point of the thread anyway but a distraction. As for some of your points:
God is always spoken of as "He," never as "They".
Genesis 1:26,27: Then God* said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness...So God created man inhis own image, in the image of God he created him.
*"Elohim" is the common name for God in the old testament. "Elohah" is singular. However Elohim is what gets used. Elohim is a plural noun. Think about that.
The dialogue admits that church and pagan gods with three heads are similar, but you say the pagans were portraying three gods whereas the churches have only one God in mind. Then why does church artwork use such pagan representations?
The representation itself is not pagan. The application is, or is not. The Temple in Jerusalem had artwork of griffin-like cherubim, even on the Ark of the Covenant itself, and there was also the bronze snake that Moses made. The "bronze sea", or pool at the temple stood upon bronze bulls.
The snake-on-a-pole and griffin motifs were not unique to the religion of Israel:
Why would Jehovah's temple have such representations in common with pagan Sumerian deities?
My point is: It is not the thing that is bad (or not), but how it is used.