It has been clearly asserted by Biblical Unitarians that Jesus Christ had no actual existence anywhere prior to his birth in Bethlehem. It has also been clearly asserted that Scriptures which appear to present some kind of pre-existence for Jesus (John's prologue, for instance) are really referring to his "notional existence" within the mind of God.

There are many questions and answers which flesh this out. Here are a few: how-do-those-who-believe-that-jesus-is-a-created-being-understand-the-verses-whi, why-don-t-unitarians-believe-that-jesus-christ-pre-existed-before-incarnation, according-to-biblical-unitarians-how-much-does-notionalism-encompass-in-john

The general idea is that God has always had the plan to cause Jesus' birth and this plan is what is referred to as the Word in John's Gospel. The Word also must incorporate the "plan in God's mind" for literally everything since all things were brought into existence through this same Word. For instance, God had the "plan" for light and when He said "Let light be" that plan was actualized.

When we are told that the Word became flesh it is here that the "plan" of God regarding Jesus was actualized and where Jesus went from "notional" to "actual" existence.

This Biblical Unitarian article presents a Word which encompasses all of God's plans and, indeed, God's rational thought itself. My question therefore is: According to Biblical Unitarians, when the Word became flesh (when the plan was actualized) was it all of the Word or part of the Word which became flesh?

  • On this view within BU (note answer to other question - there are perhaps 3 major competing theories on John's prologue within BU), John 1:14 is referring to a (very important) part of the plan 'becoming flesh', which is held to be figurative language. 'In the beginning was the plan generally' and 'a very important part of the plan became flesh' is I think how this would typically be understood. Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 22:06
  • 1
    Perhaps some rationalisation of how you think the logos can be divided would be in order. The Gr. logos as presented by scripture - story, message, reason, to say, report, speech, news, account, utterance etc. is not divisible except in some arbitrary manner by the hearer.
    – steveowen
    Commented Jul 14, 2022 at 23:54
  • A similar Q was asked christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/78138/… sadly objectivity seemed reluctant.
    – steveowen
    Commented Jul 15, 2022 at 0:40
  • 1
    "there is no specific authority on convictions of Unitarian belief aside from rejection of the Trinity" Wikipedia - Unitarianism.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jul 15, 2022 at 11:45
  • @steveowen I don't think Logos of John 1:1 can be divided as I believe it represents God's rational mind, not just one idea. If "all things" of John 1:3 means "all things" then Logos of verse 14 which became flesh is much bigger than just the plan for the birth of one person. Commented Jul 15, 2022 at 12:51


You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .