Unitarians who worship Jesus as God

[votivesoul]

It doesn't seem to me that this preacher worships Jesus as God. He never calls Jesus God (though he did say God added to His divine nature). He didn't say God became human, either. Rather, he stated that God indwelt the man Jesus Christ, and that this man now sits at the right hand of the Father.

What makes him a Unitarian is that he believes God is uni-personal, but not in the way most Oneness believers do. He may or may not be a Universalist.

Unitarians do not believe that Jesus Christ is God the Father, or is divine in any other way.

They believe that God is one, but that He did not trans-substantiate His nature in order to become human (i.e. divine eternal Spirit into human temporal flesh).

That is, what was, is, and will be about God never changes. God was in Christ, but God was not Christ. Basically, the man Christ Jesus is only that, a man (sinless, yes, and born of a virgin without a human father, as well), and God the Father is only that, God, completely distinct from one another.

[Praxeas]

How do we know this person is a Unitarian?

[votivesoul]

I guess we are taking Originalist's word for it. Maybe he can supply a link for proof?

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

It doesn't seem to me that this preacher worships Jesus as God. He never calls Jesus God (though he did say God added to His divine nature). He didn't say God became human, either. Rather, he stated that God indwelt the man Jesus Christ, and that this man now sits at the right hand of the Father.

What makes him a Unitarian is that he believes God is uni-personal, but not in the way most Oneness believers do. He may or may not be a Universalist.

Unitarians do not believe that Jesus Christ is God the Father, or is divine in any other way.

They believe that God is one, but that He did not trans-substantiate His nature in order to become human (i.e. divine eternal Spirit into human temporal flesh).



That is, what was, is, and will be about God never changes. God was in Christ, but God was not Christ. Basically, the man Christ Jesus is only that, a man (sinless, yes, and born of a virgin without a human father, as well), and God the Father is only that, God, completely distinct from one another.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Rather than believing that God became a man, this brother taught that God added the Son to his own divine being. Thus when we worship the Son, we worship the Father automatically.

The image of the Father dwells in Him, for in Christ dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. God has highly exalted Him, made Him head over all things, and given Him a Name that is above every name. At the Name of Jesus every knee shall bow, as Jehovah swore by Himself, “That unto ME every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear”.

We look for the return of the great God, even Jehovah, and our Savior, Jesus Christ, even a man born of a virgin and God. Then, as it is written, “One shall say unto Him, What are these wounds in thy hands? Then He shall answer, I was wounded in the house of my friends.”

[Praxeas]

Can we have a link to the source please? Name?

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Can we have a link to the source please? Name?

Truthfully, that is not possible. The message above is from the notes of a manuscript of a book that was never printed. The author died more than 12 years ago. I never actually met him. A mutual friend gave me a copy of the rough draft of the manuscript.

I would describe this brother as a Oneness/Unitarian hybrid. He did not believe that "God became a man", but that God fully incarnated himself in someone else, namely his human Son, and that the only God one will ever encounter is in the person of Jesus Christ.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Truthfully, that is not possible. The message above is from the notes of a manuscript of a book that was never printed. The author died more than 12 years ago. I never actually met him. A mutual friend gave me a copy of the rough draft of the manuscript.

I would describe this brother as a Oneness/Unitarian hybrid. He did not believe that "God became a man", but that God fully incarnated himself in someone else, namely his human Son, and that the only God one will ever encounter is in the person of Jesus Christ.

Luther, a trinitarian, believed the only God anyone will see is Jesus Christ, did he not?

If he was a unitarian, he could not believe 'God incarnated himself', it would seem.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Luther, a trinitarian, believed the only God anyone will see is Jesus Christ, did he not?

If he was a unitarian, he could not believe 'God incarnated himself', it would seem.

Sometimes it is hard to find the right term.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Truthfully, that is not possible. The message above is from the notes of a manuscript of a book that was never printed. The author died more than 12 years ago. I never actually met him. A mutual friend gave me a copy of the rough draft of the manuscript.

I would describe this brother as a Oneness/Unitarian hybrid. He did not believe that "God became a man", but that God fully incarnated himself in someone else, namely his human Son, and that the only God one will ever encounter is in the person of Jesus Christ.

I have no idea what "fully incarnated himself in someone else" means. To incarnate is to become human

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

I have no idea what "fully incarnated himself in someone else" means. To incarnate is to become human

Again, I'm probably not using the right term. What do you call a doctrine that teaches that God ADDED the man Christ Jesus to his own being, adding humanity to his deity?