Trinitarian logic would, by the more snarky among us, seem a bit of an oxy-moron.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
I have met nasty trinitarians. I have met nasty non-trinitarians. I don't think that checkers my view. Were I to take that view, there is a whole gammut of belief I would find hard to swallow.
My point is quite simple; I do not believe that belief or rejection of this doctrine plays any role whatever in salvation, or in an intimate walk with God. If it did, then God went to great lengths to befuddle us mere mortals by not laying it out as nicely (albeit confusingly) as the Athenasian Creed. Therefore, while I enjoy the relative merits and pleasure of a spirited discussion on this and a wide array of subjects, I find that my steam for the trinity is exhausted.
I only interject as I see someone using a verse to support something I don't see it supporting. For instance, when trinitarians use Jesus' words to Philip, "I have been with you so long and yet how is it you say 'show us the Father'" as proving Jesus is God. Well, it certainly lends support to Modalism, as Phillip said "Show us the FATHER" not "Show us GOD", and, since Father and Son are supposed to be unique and distinct persons, I guess this verse needs to be put in the "non-trinitarian" column after all.
I believe that both views--the trinitarian as well as the non-trinitarian--require one to view certain verses through a certain kind of lens to make the view work. I just feel that there are more verses needing such lenses on the trinitarian side. So, what's a boy to do?
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Regards, Brenden.