A group blog to promote discussion, debate and insight into the history, particularly religious, of America's founding. Any observations, questions, or comments relating to the blog's theme are welcomed.
While I appreciate the professor wrestling with his theology, I have done likewise though at a much less philosophical level I'm sure, I think Newman has a good point about "fullfilling their anticipations of religion, counterpart to their inward temper and modes of viewing things."
In short, [Clarke] believes in 3 divine persons, but only one, the Father is autotheos – divine through or because of himself. This one, is the one God of whom the OT speaks, i.e. Yahweh.
This illustrates the absurdity of the historian engaging in such theological hairsplitting. That this difference amounts to a new religion, that unitarians are not Christian and therefore the Founding is "not" Christian, would make no sense to anyone outside Christianity. It still quacks like a duck.
Further, the God of the founding was indeed Jehovah--Yahweh if you will--which is why the neologism "Judeo-Christian" is apt.
2 comments:
Another smart guy comments on Unitarianism:
http://www.millinerd.com/2013/07/newman-on-bad-religion.html
While I appreciate the professor wrestling with his theology, I have done likewise though at a much less philosophical level I'm sure, I think Newman has a good point about "fullfilling their anticipations of religion, counterpart to their inward temper and modes of viewing things."
In short, [Clarke] believes in 3 divine persons, but only one, the Father is autotheos – divine through or because of himself. This one, is the one God of whom the OT speaks, i.e. Yahweh.
This illustrates the absurdity of the historian engaging in
such theological hairsplitting. That this difference amounts to a new religion, that unitarians are not Christian and therefore the Founding is "not" Christian, would make no sense to anyone outside Christianity. It still quacks like a duck.
Further, the God of the founding was indeed Jehovah--Yahweh if you will--which is why the neologism "Judeo-Christian" is apt.
Post a Comment