The examples I cited went far beyond an opinion. For example the cite said that UCG did not believe in the full divinity of Jesus Christ. It's not a matter of opinion, it's not factual. This is easily determined by doing just a modicum of research.
sincerely believes ucog “Binitarianism” is contrary to the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity, and therefore disqualifies ucog as a Christian denomination,
This is a matter of biblical record. Granted some trinitarians cannot help but to read current beliefs and ideas into the past so patience is certainly called for when trying to educate others about this. And I'm perfectly willing to grant that this belief falls outside of traditional Christianity. But to claim the mantle of "Christian" based on a belief that biblical Christians never held is something that's just not right.
Douglas, I did some fact checking, and I would have drawn and did draw the same conclusion as carm. I have theological training, and am a fair reader of the written word. In all honesty, I don’t see how you can equate the “God family” concept of Armstrong to any traditional; notion of divinity held by traditional Christians. Yet you are effectively accusing anyone who disagrees with your premise of lying. I assure you. It isn’t true. Not for me, and most likely not for carm. I look at Binitarian doctrine and I see a conundrum.
On the one hand, if you share exactly the same definition of the divine nature as Trinitarians, one being, multiple persons, Nicene essence, the whole nine yards, then what is your objection to Trinitarianism, other than the numbers?
But if you reject Trinitarian belief because you feel it somehow violates Scriptural ideas on the nature of God, divinity, then how can you not see we would disagree on what sort of divinity Jesus had?
So no, at least you must concede the disagreement is honest, and we should resort to Scripture, and not accusations against character to resolve it. If you cannot agree to that, I will respect your right to believe what you will, but I will abandon the conversation. If you accuse carm, you accuse me, because I am on the same page as they are. Your choice. And no hard feelings. I know how these things go. But I do have minimal prerequisites to serious debate, and this is one of them.
As for Trinity itself as a matter of Biblical truth, for me the case is easily closed upon many and sufficient proofs. You certainly cannot expect either myself or carm to grant you your premise without putting up at least a fair fight. An amicable one, to be sure, but not rigged in advance in your favor. Or mine. But as the Scripture teaches.