Trinity:A fraud
David Flandry errancy@infidels.org
Sun, 2 May 1999 09:54:49 -0400 (00925671289, 00f001be94a3$5aa69800$e7004d0c@oemcomputer)
From: Matthew Bell <mbkbell@aapi.co.uk>
To: <errancy@infidels.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 02, 1999 3:40 AM
Subject: Re: Trinity:A fraud
> > TILL
> > Well, gee, Sims, while we're not forgetting, let's not forget about the
> > resurrection. Would it be appropriate to say that if this one element of
> the
> > Christian system is rendered disputable, or even false, then the entire
> > system is demolished? If you say no, I'll let you argue with the
apostle
> > Paul who said that if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is
vain
> (1 Cor. 15:17).
> >
> > What you apparently can't see is that some Christian doctrines are so
> > central to this religious system that if those doctrines are shown to be
> > false or indefensible, then the Christian system is rendered virtually
> > worthless.
>
> Matthew Bell
> Whilst you are correct to state that the resurrection is, according to the
> Bible an essential to the Christian's faith, Sims initial response was to
> Bakke stating the same re: the Trinity. This is easily shown to be
> fallacious by noting the amount of large 'Christian' groups, e.g.. the
> Jehovah Witnesses (approx. 4.5million), and the Mormons, (approx.9million)
> who exist whilst denying the trinity doctrine.
>
> Thanks
> M.Bell
DF:
What Sims said responding to Bakke was that you could deny parts of the
xian message while retaining all the rest. Till is saying that some
doctrine are
just too basic to xtianity. And Bell does not see the implication of the
existence of thousands of different churches based on the same supposedly
perfect bible, and all "led" by the holy spirit. And it is irrelevant to
the ontological status of a doctrine that millions of people believe it.
About a billion people believe in Islam, and its growing faster than
xtianity. That may be interesting to sociologists but
has no bearing on its ontological status.