Binitarianism In Brief

I have watched 'Tomorrow's World' from The Living Church of God, twice recently. There are some good concepts, but I am somewhat familiar with the source.

The Living Church of God

Cited

'The Living Church of God (LCG) is one of hundreds of groups that formed after the death of the late Herbert W. Armstrong, when major doctrinal changes (causing turmoil and divisions) were occurring in the former Worldwide Church of God (WCG) especially during the 1990s. The LCG was formed in December 1998 and is an offshoot organization of the Global Church of God (GCG), which formed in December 1992.

The Living Church of God is one of multifarious Sabbatarian Churches of God church groups that have sprung up from the former WCG, known today as Grace Communion International (GCI). And even from the LCG organization itself, several other split-off groups have resulted, each one of which is headed by a former LCG minister.'

Cited

'After Armstrong died, WCG began to change many of its core doctrines, a process that brought the organization into the mainstream of Evangelical Christianity. However, many members objected, and hundreds of splinter groups arose as a result.[1]'

Doctrines include:

Cited

'Christians should observe the biblical seventh-day Sabbath.' Sabbatarianism. 'Certain laws should be adhered to by Christians today, including the "dietary laws", mentioned in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14:3–21, delineating which animals may be eaten.'

This in my view is a failure to understand that the new covenant carries over the moral and ethical views of the Hebrew Bible, but is not an identical covenant to the old covenant with the same practices. Non-exhaustive references:

Luke 22:20 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood. 

Hebrews notes the Old Covenant is obsolete 

Hebrews 8:13 New American Standard Bible (NASB)

13 [a]When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is [b]ready to disappear.

'British Israelism: The belief that the Anglo-American people are descended from the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel and are the possessors of the birthright promises and accompanying blessings of Abraham’s descendants, through his grandson Jacob.'

This view would require greater scientific documentation in support.

And the main doctrine that interested me in the context of this website entry:

Cited

'Binitarianism: The belief that there is a two-person Godhead, consisting of God the Father and God the Son (also called The Word). The Holy Spirit is "not a Being", and is considered "the very essence, the mind, life, and power of God".'

Binitarianism

'Binitarianism is a Christian theology of two persons, personas, or two aspects in one substance/Divinity (or God). Classically, binitarianism is understood as a form of monotheism — that is, that God is absolutely one being; and yet with binitarianism there is a "twoness" in God, which means one God family. 'While binitarianism is sometimes used self-descriptively,[1] it is also used to denote Christian error or heresy[2]...'
---

I do not see significant biblical reasons for holding to Binitarianism. As in 'The Holy Spirit is "not a Being"...'

In Acts 5 it states:

New American Standard Bible:

5 But a man named Ananias, with his wife Sapphira, sold a piece of property, 2 and kept back some of the price for himself, with his wife’s [a]full knowledge, and bringing a portion of it, he laid it at the apostles’ feet. 3 But Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit and to keep back some of the price of the land? 4 While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not [b]under your control? Why is it that you have [c]conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men but to God.”

Lying to the Holy Spirit is equated to lying to God.

⊃ = means the same as

G (God) ⊃ H (Holy Spirit)

G ⊃ H

Matthew 28: 19-20 states that disciples are to make more disciples in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

France writes:

'It has been argued that these words were not part of the original text of Matthew, since Eusebius regularly in his pre-Nicene works quotes Matthew 28: 19 in the shorter form 'Go and make disciples of all nations in my name', but the fact that no extant manuscript of Matthew has this reading suggests that this was Eusebius' own abbreviation than a text he found in existing manuscripts' (415).

Ellison contrasts this by stating it should be interpreted: 'More literally 'into the name', i.e. as the possession of.' (1154). If this interpretation, which would need manuscript evidence (In agreement with France), was correct, it would not negate the Holy Spirit as God. There is no good New Testament reason, in my opinion, to reject trinitarian doctrine.

On what basis is the 'Helper' (NASB) from the Gospel of John, the Holy Spirit in the New Testament, anything other than God? Biblically, there appears no other spiritual (can apprehend God) ontological entities other than God, angelic beings, Satan, demonic beings and human beings. If the Holy Spirit is simply the Spirit of the Father and/or Son, why is this not made clear in the New Testament? Why is it (he) is differentiated as God, yet distinct from God the Father and God the Son?

ELLISON, H. L (1986) 'Matthew' in The New International Bible Commentary, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan, Grand Rapids.

FRANCE, R.T. (1985)(2001) Matthew, IVP/Eerdmans, Grand Rapids.

Logical v Reasonable

Instagram Vancouver

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Blackburn defines

Logic:

Cited

'The general science of inference. Deductive logic, in which a conclusion follows from a set of premises, is distinguished from inductive logic, which studies the way in which premises may support a conclusion without entailing it. In deductive logic the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.' (221).

A former academic adviser of mine at Canadian Baptist Seminary/Trinity Western University, stated once (paraphrased) that many people use the terms 'logic' and 'logical' incorrectly.

Blackburn explains that 'The aim of logic is to make explicit the rules by which inference may be drawn, rather than to study the actual reasoning processes that people use, which may or may not conform to those rules. (221).

If I stated: 'I am a theist, I am an atheist', that is logically impossible and contradictory.

If I stated: 'I am a theist, I am a Hulk', that is logical, but not reasonable. It is not logically contradictory as I could hypothetically and theoretically be a Hulk, by an act of science or supernaturally, but the statement is not supported by premises as reasonable and sound (true). It is physically impossible (at present) that I am a Hulk, but it is not logically impossible.

Blackburn writes concerning 'reason' under the 'rationality' entry. (319-320).

Rationality:

'Pieces of behaviour, beliefs, arguments, policies and other exercises of the human mind may all be described as rational. To accept something as rational is to accept it as making sense, as appropriate.' (319).  It is aiming for the truth and the good. (319).

At times people state that something is 'logical' when in reality they should state that something is 'reasonable'. The reasonable will be logical, but the logical, not always reasonable.

If one is stating that something is true, the term 'reasonable' is usually the more accurate philosophical term than logical.

Biblical friendship

evbuc.com

Part of my work is processing social media for Prayer Current. Prayer Current will be at Missionsfest in Vancouver, January 27-29.

Missionsfest Vancouver

Prayer Current is a Christian, bible-based, prayer ministry.

A key working textbook of the ministry is 

SMED, JOHN with HWANG, JUSTINE (2016) Engage: The Conversation with God, with believers, with seekers, Vancouver, Prayer Current.

I was asked to review the text. This is non-exhaustive being consistent with this media format. As per the citation style I was taught within British academia, citations will primarily be in my own words.

Prayer Friendship with Jesus

Praying to God as a friend would be a two-way, conversion. (8). From the New Testament, Jesus Christ, as God the Son, brings in people to a two-way conversation with God, through prayer. (8). As Jesus Christ is both infinite God and perfect man, in obedience to God the Father, through the Holy Spirit, he completed the atoning work and resurrection for the salvation of humanity. Apart from Christ, human beings 'experience a kind of solitary confinement.' (8). Indeed, based on the New Testament, from Acts 4: 12, it is explained human salvation can be obtained from no one or nowhere else, other than through Jesus Christ. This is controversial in some circles, but biblical, none the less.

English Standard Version

And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

New American Standard Bible

"And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

Jesus Christ and his atonement and resurrection applied to believers is God's gift to humanity in friendship. (9). The text quotes John 15: 13-16 and from v 16  'You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you...' (9).

Readers may recognize that the Prayer Current text states the concept in modern philosophical terms, of compatibilism, which I have discussed thoroughly within my British academic work and on this website. In basics terms it states that God's sovereignty is compatible with human free will; what I define as limited free will. Human beings have a limited free will only, as secondary causes, not primary causes, choosing within their nature. Human nature is corrupted due to the fall (Genesis 3, Romans 1-6), while God's nature is infinitely good. Through the 'search' feature, top right on this website, more related entries on this website can be found.

However, Jesus Christ choosing his disciples and eventually apostles in John 15 as friends, is theologically consistent with Pauline concepts of compatibilism in Ephesians 1 and Romans 8, where persons are chosen in Jesus Christ. True effective, biblical prayer essentially relies on this divine-human connection that within the Reformed tradition, is initiated by God.

Praying For Appointments

I appreciate how theological the 'Engage' text is, as is 'God In The Conversation', which I also reviewed on this website. This is useful:

Quote:

'When you confess your sins you are completely washed clean of them. An old saying captures this truth:

That Jesus died on the cross is history.
That Jesus died for sin in theology.
That Jesus died for my sin is Christianity.' (83).

This application of the atonement and sacrifice for a person involves on the part of a person an embracing of the gospel message, given by God. This leads to the biblical prayer model of Jesus Christ as the mediator between God the Father and humanity (The book of Hebrews).

Politicians & Prayer

Neither Prayer Current or I, is particularly politically focused. But I find the citation below, enlightening.

'Politicians focus on outside issues for good reasons. The heart is harder to change than the environment.' (91).

To whatever extent our global environment is corrupted, and I reason it is, this problem of evil, like all problems of evil, humanly speaking, comes from a corrupted human heart. Environmental problems are symptoms of a corrupted human heart, a corrupted human nature.

I very much agree with the text that 'the inner pollution never gets cleaned up' by simply cleaning the outside (91). Even if humanity cleans up the earth's environment, without the regeneration (Titus 3: 5) work of Jesus Christ applied to persons, problems of sin and evil will continue.

Engage

Brief on real suffering (PhD Edit)

I just received some difficult news in regards to a good friend. In discussion we were reminded that as I recently stated on Twitter:

Sometimes one has to dig deeper than typical evangelical answers...

PhD Edit

Theodicy and Practical Theology, The University of Wales, Trinity Saint David (2010).

Real suffering should not be denied for the sake of any theological system, as the logical and reasonable nature of a good theodicy does not take away the seriousness of suffering. Real suffering provides opportunity for pastoral counseling and theology.

Only God alone can ultimately free his creation from suffering. Although human beings can somewhat minimize the suffering of others in many cases. But a theodicy may explain to some degree, how God works within his creation that contains evil and suffering.

Romans 8:28-30

New American Standard Bible (NASB)

28 And we know that [a]God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29 For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30 and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

THE NEW AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION BIBLE (1984) Iowa Falls, Iowa, World Bible Publishers.