non-trinitarian

A non-Trinitarian is, by definition (see above), a non-Christian.

Many Jews, Muslims, and non-Trinitarian Christians argue that there is no real difference between Trinity and tritheism.

So Newton saw no issue with working on the calculus at the same time as being an alchemist and a non-trinitarian.

Most obviously, non-trinitarian Christian churches have popped up sporadically since then, and several exist today.

Yeah, non-trinitarian Christianity is Mormons, Jehovas Witnesses, and it gets much more obscure from there.

There are enough Bible thumpers in the USA at least vaguely familiar with early Christological disputes, that non-trinitarian denominations like Oneness Pentecostalism[0] were founded.

Probably because they're non-trinitarian.

> Whereas, non-Trinitarian Christians, the Catholic Church views their beliefs to directly touch on what the sacrament of baptism is about, so their non-Trinitarianism invalidates their baptisms from the Catholic viewpoint.

Mormons do get drawn outside of Christianity by some christians for a variety of reasons (non-trinitarian, open canon, cosmological background quasi-polytheism), and some people have suggested classifying the faith as another Abrahamic one as a means of sidestepping that discussion, which may be where one could get the idea that the comparison to Muslims is a good one.

So the accusation of monophysitism was still a serious business especially in the wider Orthodox community.) The official explanation was that three fingers stood for the Trinity - but non-trinitarian Christian denominations were already so obscure at that point, it was seen kinda like declaring that water is wet, i.e.

I didn't claim they were a complete set (they're not, you have to include Mormonism and other non-trinitarian religions that believe in Christ, then to a lesser extent you have Baha'i (which it turns out is literally answering this question) and the Yazidi faith, and probably more).

Famed radical non-Trinitarian Bible-nut Newton was driven by the stated belief that he was observing the need for a deity to interact with the universe, but I'm not convinced that unorthodox Scriptural interpretation can claim any particular merit as a belief system on account of being the motivation for an individual influential physicist.

It's much easier to gain a rudimentary understanding of "what non-trinitarian gnostics believed" from inquisitors and heresiologists than it is from reading gnostic sources.

It is for this reason that Christians have judged the LDS baptism "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit", as a non-Christian, non-Trinitarian ceremony without effect, because even when using the same words, LDS are *saying and believing something entirely different*.