Rantings, Ravings, and Recantations of a Heretic

OK. I said it. I said that I wondered whether the Trinity was as central as it is made out to be here at Duke. This statement has been taken with a considerable amount of confusion and name calling (thank you Wilson), not to mention caused me a considerable amount of confusion for myself. So let me say here what I think I may mean (obviously I'm still somewhat confused) and what I definitely do not mean. Let's begin with the later:

I do not mean:
1. That the Trinity is not true or real
2. That God is not at the center of everything
3. That I do not believe in the Trinity
4. That I will not teach the Trinity

What I may mean:
1. That the doctrine of the Trinity is our best estimation of God, but that the doctrine while true and full, is not God in the fullest, who is incomprensible in the end except from what God has told us about Godself (I hate that word "godself." I wish there were a better one.)
2. That the doctrine of the Trinity is not the place I would begin with evangelism or a presentation of the faith to an unbeliever or even a nominal believer.
3. That intellectual assent to the doctrine of the Trinity does not necessarily mean one is a Christian.
4. That intellectual doubt of the doctrine of the Trinity does not necessarily mean one is not saved (in the fullest Wesleyan sense) or being saved, but probably does mean that one is not a Christian (in the lowest sense of the word...The way that Lewis uses it in Mere Christianity).

Whether these things that I may mean above add up to the Trinity not being central or not, I do not know. Thus, I publically recant from any declaration that the Trinity is not central.

I still wonder whether the emphasis on the Trinity does not end up causing us (myself included) to fall into what I see as possible errors above.

Onward Christian peacemakers,
Tom