Do you accept the apostles creed?, Nicene creed? Athanasius creed? Chalcedonean creed? Were these written with the intent of being incomprehensible or do they provide clear truths to be understood, comprehended, and provide standards of orthodoxy? I am not debating that God is incomprehensible, but I am certainly asserting that what God has revealed to mankind in the Scriptures is intended to be comprehended by man and that the doctrine of the Trinity is certainly revealed in Scripture and summarized clearly and is comprehensible both in the historical creeds and revelation. Those that deny such are heterodox at best. I also assert that such creeds would be impossible to comprehend without understanding the axiomatic truths of scripture and the proper use of logic. To say that the Trinity is a mystery and incomprehensible is indicative of the intellectual laziness and zeitgeist of our age.
Discussion
I think we're arguing about words, perhaps talking past one another. Yes, I affirm the ecumenical creeds; I've read the Nicene and Ante-Nicene fathers; I've basked in the glow of the Reformed and Post-Reformation greats like Owen and Turretin and Witsius and á Brakel. Just because the doctrine is clear (perspicuous) doesn't mean it's comprehensible (in the technical sense).
I know that Christ has two natures in one person--but that doesn't mean I fully comprehend how the hypostatic union *works.* I know that God is numerically one, but exists eternally in three persons (or 'prosopons') - equal in substance, power, and glory -- but that doesn't mean I fully comprehend how that works. It's not a puzzle to be solved, it's a mystery to be wondered at. "Thus far shall you go, and no further."
The point of my post is that rationalism is as faulty as irrationalism. There are some things that are too high for us, not just because we are lazy (though sometimes we are) but because God is ultimately "unsearchable, his ways past finding out." Some will reject an idea about the infinite because they cannot fully grasp it in their finite mind--which is to bring God down to earth. Hubris is as faulty as sloth.
We are called to love him with all of our mind, to grow in understanding, to move from the "milk" to the "meat" - but there comes a point where the finite reaches its border and we must simply bow in awe. I am not saying God is unknowable--He is (because we share some attributes with him and he is able to communicate himself to us)--I am saying he is incomprehensible. The finite cannot fully contain the infinite. Treating the deep things of God like so many lego pieces to be assembled is to show hubris where humility is called for.
Deut. 29:29
'Incomprehensible' is a theological term--it doesn't mean "nonsense" or "gibberish."
I would again recommend this: "[Our Incomprehensible God](https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/our-incomprehensible-god)" from Ligonier.