• Welcome to White Horse Forums. We ask that you would please take a moment to introduce yourself in the New Members section. Tell us a bit about yourself and dive in!

Defining the godhead - an open discussion on Unitarianism, Binitarianism and Trinitarianism

Wrangler said:
Again, all this is irrelevant to what is the name of Jesus’ God.
Click to expand...
Actually... that seems MORE irrelevant to the topic than my questions.
Here's the topic title below. In case you forgot what we are talking about.
We are NOT talking about "the name of Jesus' God."

Defining the godhead - an open discussion on Unitarianism, Binitarianism and Trinitarianism​


]
 
SteVen said:
We are NOT talking about "the name of Jesus' God."

Defining the godhead - an open discussion on Unitarianism ...​

Click to expand...
Unitarianism 101. There is only one God, Jesus' God and his name is YHWH.

I'm glad this thread title begins with the clarity of Unitarianism. It puts the multi-person Being engima into its proper perspective.

Not sure how you envisioned this thread proceeding. Delving into unit, bi and tri at first then discussing all 3 might be convenient. Are you an advocate for Binitarianism? I think it was @APAK who said Christianity evolved into binittarianism in the 4th century before settling on the trinity? One of the merits I see of binitarian that I see is what @APAK called the Dynamic Duo.

For instance, John 1:18 (REV) "No one has ever seen God; the only begotten Son, who is in a most intimate relationship with the Father, he has explained him." references only God (the Father) and the Son of God. There are many such verses and the wording of some translations seem to support binitarianism.

In my experience, it is best not to speak for beliefs that aren't your own. We have natural biases against what we don't hold to be true. If there are any binitarians on this forum, I'd love to hear your thoughts on Scriptural support for a 2-person God.
 
Wrangler said:
I'm glad this thread title begins with the clarity of Unitarianism. It puts the multi-person Being engima into its proper perspective.
Click to expand...
I should have gone with alphabetical order instead of numeric. - LOL

Defining the godhead - an open discussion on Binitarianism, Trinitarianism, and Unitarianism​


Now that puts things in perspective!

' cc: @Mr E
 
SteVen said:
That saw cuts both ways.
Click to expand...
Well, there is really only one saw. Only one who advocates for a proposition, should advocate for it. All others are natural critics.

When you try to speak on behalf of a position you do not hold to be true, invoking Strawman is the likely result. Please hear me. I'm not saying it is impossible to accurately summarize the other side. It's just not ones natural inclination.

Decades ago, this was brought to the forefront regarding politics. Everyone is FOR something. No one is against something. Take Abortion. It's Pro-Life v Pro-Choice. A Pro-Lifer might say the other side wants to kill babies. A Pro-Choicer may say the other side wants to enslave women. Inflammatory rhetoric, yes. Accurate portrayel of the other side? Hmmm. Depends on what side you are on. LOL
 
SteVen said:
I should have gone with alphabetical order instead of numeric. - LOL

Defining the godhead - an open discussion on Binitarianism, Trinitarianism, and Unitarianism​


Now that puts things in perspective!

' cc: @Mr E
Click to expand...

Shouldn't your list go 1...2...3...? ;)

I think you had it in proper order from the outset.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top