DaleSteve, you seem to have little idea of Christian unitarian theology. If you did, you’d know that we too believe in a self-revealing God, who by his spirit inspired the prophets and apostles, and through them the Bible, and who loved us so much that he sent his only Son as the best and last revelation of him.
But
doesn’t Dale classify himself as a “humanitarian unitarian”? Here’s how he
defines that category:
Some Christian unitarians past and present define their thesis as the claim that Christ has a human nature but not a divine nature – that is, they define a unitarian has what I have called a humanitarian unitarian (what is nowadays often called a “biblical unitarian”), understood as implying that Jesus existed no earlier than his conception.
So on
that definition, in what sense is Jesus God’s “only Son”? Isn’t Dale just
playing a shell-game?
Notice,
too, that Dale says God sent Jesus, not to save us, but to merely reveal
himself to us. Indeed, how could a merely human Jesus save us? How could he even save himself?
I also have a question for Dale.
ReplyDeleteHow can my Jesus lay His Life down and pick it up again as He said He would and did?
Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice. So there will be one flock, one shepherd.
Joh 10:17 For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
Joh 10:18 No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father."
"in what sense is Jesus God’s “only Son”"
ReplyDeleteIn the sense the angel says in Lk 1:35 - And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.
"therefore"
"Dale says God sent Jesus, not to save us".
Sorry, wrong again. I say all that the NT says about him and his mission, including that.
About taking up his life - the NT also says repeatedly that God (which in context means, the Father) raised him. The authority in the passage - and presumably the power to act on it - is given by God, to Jesus.
Let me end by adapting a statement by a great theologian: "Do I think unitarians can be genuine Christians? Sure. Conversely, some trinitarians are nominal Christians. Some unitarians are heavenbound while some trinitarians are hellbound."
Dale
ReplyDelete"In the sense the angel says in Lk 1:35 - And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God."
And how, on unitarian humanitarian terms, does that single out Jesus as God's *only* Son. After all, the Holy Spirit consecrates many other human beings in the OT and the NT.
"Sorry, wrong again. I say all that the NT says about him and his mission, including that."
You *say* the same thing, but you don't *mean* the same thing.
"About taking up his life."
And how does a merely human Jesus "save us" by "taking up his life"? How does that save *others*? Indeed, you just indicated that he can't even save himself.
"Some unitarians are heavenbound while some trinitarians are hellbound."
You're half right. The first clause is wrong, but the second clause is correct.