According to Biblical Unitarians, how much does "notionalism" encompass in John's prologue?

Question

The Biblical Unitarian (BU) perspective on the pre-incarnational existence of the Son of God, revealed in such verses as John 1:1-2

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God.

is that this pre-incarnational existence was a notional existence. A Biblical Unitarian website describes notional existence as opposed to literal existence as follows:

Notional pre-existence is the idea that something or someone may ‘exist’ in the mind of God before actualizing on earth in history at the appointed time. What God purposes and decrees is considered so certain that it is spoken of as though it already exists.

My question is regarding to what degree Biblical Unitarians carry "notionalism" throughout John's prologue. For instance, if we parenthetically add (notional) to John 1:1-2 it would look like this and, from what I understand, BU would agree:

In the beginning was the (Word/notionality), and the (Word/notionality) was with God, and the Word (notionally) was God. The same was (notionally) in the beginning with God.

Can verse 3 be rendered in similar fashion: Were all things only notionally created through him?

All things were (notionally) made by (the notional) him; and without (the notional) him was not any thing (notionally) made that was (notionally) made.

Can verse 4 be rendered in similar fashion: Was it only a notional life that was the notional light of men?

In (the notional) him was (notional) life; and the (notional) life was the (notional) light of men.

Can verse 6 be rendered in similar fashion: Did the notional light only notionally shine in the darkness?

And the (notional) light (notionally) shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

I don't know if I should ask whether the darkness and the non-comprehension are notional as well but the above questions are only intended as illustrative.

Ultimately, I am asking if Biblican Unitarians believe that the notional idea of Christ, the Son of God includes not just God's idea of an individual who is to come but also the creation, devastation, and reconciliation of everything through that individual.

In other words, Does everything God has ever thought have notional existence within Logos as long as it remains as His thought? For example, Did light exist notionally prior to God speaking? and, if so, did it exist notionally within Logos?

Answer 1

There are 3 main Biblical Unitarian views of John's prologue (John 1:1-18).

1. The first is that the logos = God's plan or thoughts, and the beginning is the old beginning (Genesis 1).

2. The second is that the Logos = a personification of God's word, and the beginning is the old beginning (Genesis 1).

3. The third is that the Logos = Jesus (similar to how Jesus is the Light, the Bread, the Gate, and so on throughout John - it is a title or identifier which refers to Jesus), and the beginning is the new beginning (Mark 1:1, 1 John 1:1).

In all these cases, Biblical Unitarians (BUs) do not hold that John 1:1-13 refers to notional pre-existence of the logos. In the first two, God's plan or word really did pre-exist Jesus. In the third one, the beginning is Jesus' ministry, and so doesn't pre-exist Jesus.

So, for BUs who hold to one of the first two, the logos ('Word') of John 1 is not identified with Jesus. Rather, the understanding of 'Logos' is along the lines of an idea, plan, or indeed speech (as in Genesis 1, where God speaks things into existence - it is God's creative power). So at John 1:14, "the Logos became flesh" is understood similar to "the plan took shape" or "the idea became the cup" or even "the score became music" or "the script became a play". That is, the logos leads to, informs, and is reflected in Jesus. In this sort of sense, the Logos became flesh.

On the first two views, then, Jesus (= the Christ) comes to exist at his conception, which is held to be John 1:14, and they would hold this is then describing in different language what is also described at Luke 1:35. The lead up to this is a bit complex interpretively, because of the vagueness of John's language, but throughout John 1 these BUs typically hold John is describing what actually happened (the logos actually was with God, things actually were made through the logos, John the Baptist actually arrives on the scene, and so on).

This talk by Dale Tuggy (a BU) is a good discussion of John 1 from this sort of BU perspective, including an historical survey of interpretations, including a useful handout for the talk.

On the third view, however, John 1:14's kai ho logos sarx egeneto refers not to Jesus' conception (which is never discussed in John's Gospel) but rather to the beginning of Jesus' ministry (and so dovetails with John 1's 'beginning', which on this view is also the beginning of Jesus' ministry).

Also see 1 John 4:2, "Jesus Christ has come in the flesh [sarki]," similar to John 1:14 and to Weymouth's translation of John 1:14 ("And the Word came in the flesh"). See Jesus' own "for this reason I was born and came into the world" at John 18:37 - the coming appears to happen after his birth, not before it, and is consistent with the start of his ministry.

So naturally, Jesus begins his ministry and then 'tabernacled among us' (also in John 1:14, immediately after 'kai ho logos sarx egeneto') as an itinerant teacher (similar to how the Angel of the Lord tabernacles among the ancient Israelites as they wandered about).