darinhouston wrote:Then you would be comfortable with a binity?
Comfortable to fellowship with someone with that view? Sure.
Comfortable to take the view myself? Only if I were persuaded
I have no problem with the eternal relationship issue.
Since you (below) raise the question of the eternality of the Son, I think we may disagree on whether you have a problem with the eternal relationship issue. Unless you are just talking about whether or not He always existed as the Son (a question I consider of little importance). The issue, for me, is whether or not God is, by very nature, a relationship. I consider the YES answer to that question quite important to theology.
It's the trinity formulation that seems artificial.
Well, the 'trinity formulation' certainly is artificial (man-made). But my earlier point was that it either IS or IS NOT true. SOMETHING is true about God's makeup. And it's too easy, I think, for people to criticize the trinitarian formulation without also positing a better argued alternative. I think we're on the same page as to the lack of certainty surrounding it, though.
Why is the HS a separate person?
I don't consider myself to be a person governed by church tradition. But I am a Wesleyan... and we have this thing called 'The Wesleyan Quadrilateral.' We believe that truth is discovered via Scripture and that reason, tradition, and experience are helpful (albeit secondary) sources of information (and that they help us interpret Scripture). To me, I tend to think that the church didn't haphazardly land on three. It's not like they argued intensively for Jesus' deity and then said "well, why not add another?" The Scriptures certainly COULD be interpreted in a trinitarian way and the fact that the fairly early church DID come to interpret it that way should be thoughtfully considered (and I know you have and do thoughtfully consider it).
Why is the Word not?
The Word is.
Why the eternality of the Son?
This goes back to my biggest reason for defending the Trinity (or binity) formulation of God. I believe that the world which exists makes the most sense if the God who made it is a relationship. And God is only a relationship if there are at least 2 'eternal' partners involved.
These are important to consider - not so important to decide.
Agreed.
But deciding them and insisting that they are primary, doctrinally, does require argument and defense. (Not that you do so).
Agreed.