Biwiring means using two wires. It's a silly idea IMO. Just use one bigger wires. So I will discuss it no further (and you can read articles online where electrical engineers dismiss it as well.)
Passive biamping might make sense if you happen to have two stereo amps lying around. Let's say you don't, though, and you are considering whether to buy amps.
Given that this is passive, you will send two mostly identically amped signals to your speaker. One signal will be high passed, and the other low passed. You just wasted the power needed to amplify the part of the signal that was filtered out by the low and high pass portions of the crossover. So buying two amps just to have part of their power wasted seems silly to me.
With active biamping, you only amplify what will be needed. You have a speaker with no crossover, or a disconnected crossover. You send a low passed, LINE level signal to the "low" amp, and a high passed LINE level signal to the "high" amp. Each amp amplifies the signal and is directly connected to the proper driver (there might still be a crossover in the case of 2-way active biamping and a 3-way speaker, such as to crossover the mid/tweeter.)
So yes, there seems to be a benefit to active biamping, where passive biamping appears to waste power.
Now for receivers, where you already have the capability, I would guess it's even more pointless as a general rule. You are loading the same shared power supply with two amps rather than one. Where is the extra power coming from? You are drawing from the same limited resource.
There is a scenario where it could help, I guess. Let's say you were clipping on a stereo signal because you were hitting your rail voltage limitation. If biamping got around that, maybe biamping would help. Some people have used bimaping and liked the results. No way to tell if they invented the improvement in their head, or not.
Feel free to chime in if you know differently.