Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity

[Wm. Taylor]

Well stated, John. Thank you. When I said trash, I was thinking in terms of discarding, to throw away, to stop using. I agree, I should have selected my words more carefully here.   Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 11:12 PM Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Trinity In a message dated 3/9/2004 5:11:58 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The answer now, it seems to me, is not to trash the language -- as if that will make the controversy go away -- but to learn how to speak it in a way that is both historically and biblically accurate, while meaningful and true. You have much to say, Bill Taylor.   I prefer to narrow the discussion to a single point.   Allow me that discretion here, now. If you imply that the principle I presented somehow  degrades an opposing view ("trash" is the word  -- a bit harsh for my intentions), I do not agree.   My statement: "I am afraid that if we try to explain what has not been fully revealed, we give the enemy another target.,"  is a rule of biblical interpretation I follow.   I see God's revelation in the biblical message and nowhere else.   I believe that He said what He said with perfect intention and purpose.  In the above, you speak of the challenge of worded conclusions that are both historically and biblically accurate.   I believe to be biblically accurate is to be historically true.    Therefore, I am personally free to exegete my way to biblical conclusions and assume that all other consideration will fall in line.  I am educated by the Word; I am entertained by history.    Grace John Smithson