[ Home | Contents | Search | Post | Reply | Next | Previous | Up ]
Date: September 02, 2012
Time: 06:41 PM
, one of the best examples is the dnfeerfice between Dr. Brown and Dr. White on whether ‘Jesus is YHWH’ or not. Just ask them and you’ll see.I have interacted with the materials of both of these men extensively, and as far as I can see there is no disagreement between them on any issue pertaining to the doctrine of the Trinity.How about the ‘eternal generation’ debate? Which looks to me to be split down the middle. And this is key since your talking about whether or not the Son is eternal or if he had an “origin” somewhere/time.I subscribe to the idea of eternal generation, personally, as do all who confess with the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds. This is the sizable majority, so I don't think that it's split down the middle. But at any rate, I think those who deny eternal generation yet call themselves Trinitarians either misunderstand what eternal generation means or are not true Trinitarians.Arians are not unitarians as such. The doctrine of there being only One Who is God and the origin of the Son at his birth has been pretty much a constant since early Sociniands like Michael Servetus in the 1500s. Check your history.Strictly speaking, yes, Arians are unitarian in their confessions about God, as are Muslims. Now, if you want to get technical with the term unitarian and say it can only be correctly applied to the theological descendants of Socinus and Servetus, fine, but note that you are choosing to define your group (Unitarianism) to exclude certain parties (like Arians) but not allowing me to define Trinitarianism to exclude modalists and tri-theists. That's a double standard.