Comments on: Socinianism

By: Richard Morgan

Richard Morgan — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:11:59 +0000

In reply to Richard Morgan. I find your caricature of Sociniansm and their spiritual successors to be somewhat confusing. As a biblical unitarian myself I let scripture interpret itself, read it in context and apply sound hermeneutics. I don't believe silly things like God having a body. It's easy to knock something down if you paint it erroneously, but what you're doing is just constructing a straw man.

By: Richard Morgan

Richard Morgan — Mon, 30 Dec 2019 03:03:39 +0000

Thanks for this. I am trying to do some research on Socinianism and Unitarianism (not modern-day Unitarianism which is nothing like Socinianism). As a non-trinitarian myself (I don’t find the concept of the Trinity anywhere in the Bible) I am intrigued by the intellectual heritage I have received, which is about letting Scripture interpret itself, and I think the Polish Brethren were adept at that. I don’t think Reformers like Calvin went far enough in leaving behind Catholic traditions and they should have let go of non-biblical ideas like the Trinity too.

By: Baus

Baus — Wed, 27 Nov 2019 19:35:10 +0000

worthwhile note from Schaff:

“All creeds are more or less imperfect and fallible. The Bible alone is the rule of faith (regula credendi), the norma normans, and claims divine and therefore absolute authority; the creed is a rule of public teaching (regula docendi), the norma normata, and has only ecclesiastical and therefore relative authority, which depends on the measure of its agreement with the Bible. Confessions may be improved (as the Apostles’ Creed is a gradual growth from the baptismal formula), or may be superseded by better ones with the increasing knowledge of the truth.”

https://books.google.com/books?id=DVJEAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA406#v=onepage&q&f=false