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