@aqwsed12345:
My wife and I, in general, don't really like organized religion. So, we raised our kids outside of an environment with Biblical stories. They didn't get any of the standard cultural mythologies either - Santa, tooth fiery, easter, etc.They never got pulled into "church on Sunday" experience, and especially not the JW meetings. They have grown up, aware of religion, but never steeped in the details of theologies, never practicing how to belive things that, on their surface seem incredible.
So, one day my daughter (10 years old) gets invited to a church "ballet dance fun fair". All free, of course, and so my wife and I, not being gullible, understood this was a recruiting tactic, and somewhat of a bait-and-switch. This is one of those Trinitarian Baptist churches that have a full gym adjoining the meeting hall. They do potlucks and other get-togethers there. Nevertheless, my daughter wanted to go because she loves dance, and wanted to be with friends. I went along to keep the wolves at bay. Sure enough, after all the "activities" (which all had side references to something religious), there was a kids "session" in the "sactuary" - fancy words for a sermon. The kids gathered, and it was very interactive with questions about Jesus and salvation and sacrifice. Most of the kids were into it, answering and accepting. My daughter, however, had the strangest look on her face. She was attempting to process, not only the details of the story, but the rationale behind the story. The need for forgiveness, and the necessity of human / God sacrifice in order to attain it. The look is basically a "wtf" face. What's this about a "ransom"? Jesus paid it, to whom? God? If God wished to forgive, why does that necessitate a sacrifice? Why not just forgive, like my parents do when I do something wrong? It was utter nonsense to her. Yet, the other children were not only OK with it, but acting quite matter-of-fact about it. Those kids seemed to be understanding something... or at least they thought they did. For them, the words they were using had a different meaning, even though these words my daughter had heard and defined before. There was a different meaning to them. It occured to me then that the amount of groundwork needed to even begin to accept and believe is emense.
The idea, then, that someone would have to come from a ground zero to a full blown trinitarian just to be saved is ridiculous. Look at the other threads you are participating in - throwing around terms like "essence" and "being" vs "nature". Not to mention "hypostatic union".
If a normal, average person, reads the Bible, that person may, in all sincerity believe in a unitarian God. Or perhaps a modal view. As they read, and believe, and have hope, they understand that this is the way God has revealed Himself through scripture - just as you do. And yet to be saved, really saved, as an objective standard, one must come to believe concepts that may require them to study for years. Perhaps even learn a little bit of dead languages. How many common meek men have been excluded from salvation because it requires, not only faith, but a theological degree as well? Is a man with an IQ of 75 savable?
I don't fault you too much. The unitarian belivers say the same thing of you, just with different details.
Now I somewhat sensed that you heading toward the idea that true salvation would mean connection and communion with God - and that would inform the true believer. Although I don't think you stated that explicitly. This is what you were implying when you referred to being "infused by grace". Knowing the truth... the real truth is a gift from God, when He acts to save. If that's the case, that just proves my point even further.