pinklight

I personaly do not know what the whole of the historic church supports or doesn’t regarding whatever view of the Trinity, but I do know this, if a passage alone without a doubt cannot support whichever type of of view of the Trinity, then it really doesn’t matter either way what the leaders of the historic church thought or taught as any one’s views are secondary to the written word. Proof positive is what it all comes down to. And I don’t see justification for any doctrine that cannot be proven without a doubt from the scriptures, and to me anything other is just lame.

We can believe that Adam ate an apple if we want to (except even that can be disproven) but really who cares if we can’t prove our stance? I couldn’t expect anyone to take me seriously if I was like “I believe in this scripturaly but I can’t prove it scripturaly.” How silly.