Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Trinity/Messiah and Referential Aberration
Message-ID: <1334@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 22-Aug-85 09:28:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.1334
Posted: Thu Aug 22 09:28:16 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 19:22:49 EDT
References: <185@unc.unc.UUCP>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 23

In article <185@unc.unc.UUCP> fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) writes:

>>	Discussion of a religious idea such as the Trinity leads
>> quite quickly into a dark valley.  Allegedly, what we are talking
>> about is an existence which, if it exists, resists direct observation.
>> It is further alleged that the true object is unknowable (i.e., that
>> it is impossible to mentally represent it correctly).  Therefore,
>> there is an important sense in which the doctrine is symbolic of existence
>> rather than descriptive.

>This makes perfect sense to me.  What I do find confusing,
>however, is that some would say that the decision to adopt this
>one particular symbolic visualization of God, rather than another,
>would make the difference between an afterlife of constant bliss,
>versus one of eternal torture.

I wouldn't claim that it does.  I'm one of those wishy-washy Anglicans, and,
while we'll argue at great lengths against non-trinitarian heresies, we
stop short of claiming that ANYONE is destined for eternal death.

Charley Wingate

   The wind blows where it pleases