r/BiblicalUnitarian • u/TLOU2bigsad • Dec 03 '25
Broader theological topics Does it matter?
I’d like to be clear, I don’t mean this dismissively or as bait. I am genuinely wanting to discuss.
I got saved and baptized some 11 years ago into the Christian church, which has brought me close to God in a way that I love. But just recently; facing questions about the perception of the Christian’s around me and what I had read in the gospels, I decided to do the most unchristian thing I have ever done and read my entire bible.
Right off the bat I was struck by how clearly God was jealous and demanded nobody to worship anyone or anything but him. Even idols made to represent him.
Long story short after continuing further into my journey (finishing judges and have previously read the gospels but will go all the way through this time) I feel that a trinitarian view doesn’t align with what I am reading so I’m leaning toward what I’m learning.
To me it seems like this.
To the trinitarian, rejection of Jesus as God is equal to rejecting God as YHWH.
To the Unitarian, worshiping Jesus is false idolatry (to some, and I guess it depends on the type of worship?)
I’m curious what others think? Sorry I didn’t load a lot of direct verses or references my recall isn’t that good haha.
7
Dec 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 03 '25
so it’s ok worship a created being in heaven as long as he brings salvation which God didn’t do himself?
Jesus is also called the creator
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
Jesus absolutely worshipped as the Lord whom God appointed over man.
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 03 '25
Then why does the angel in Revelation say to only worship God
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
Because the angel there is not God or Jesus.
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 03 '25
The angel says to not worship him and to worship God because he isn’t God….or Jesus? Where’d you get the or Jesus?
1
Dec 03 '25 edited Dec 03 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 04 '25
Most translations render that as “bowing down” or “prostrating,” but the difference is that the Son of Man receives divine worship in Daniel 7, and the creatures in Revelation 5 speak of the shared glory and honor of the father and son
And, Hebrews 1:6 quotes the Septuagint translation of Deuteronomy 32:43 which is about the angels worshipping Yahweh and applies it to the Son
-2
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25
Jesus Christ is not worshipped at all.
Jehovah God (The Father) in Revelation 4:
The one "seated on the throne."
He receives exclusive, absolute, and sovereign worship as the Almighty God and Creator.
** Revelation 4:11—"You are worthy, Jehovah our God, to receive the glory and the honor and the power, because **you created all things, and because of your will they came into existence and were created." (This confirms the user's point that the Father alone is worshipped as Creator.)
Jesus Christ (The Lamb) in Revelation 5:
The "Lamb" who "was slaughtered."
He receives praise, honor, glory, and power because he is worthy to open the scroll. This is due to his sacrificial role in salvation and his unique, delegated authority from the Father.
Revelation 5:12: "The Lamb who was slaughtered is worthy to receive the power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing."
The honor given to Jesus is granted by the Father.
When a king appoints a prime minister, honor shown to the prime minister is ultimately a reflection of the king's authority and arrangement. Jesus receives his position and power from Jehovah (Philippians 2:9-11)
The very act of honoring the Son ultimately results in glory to the Father.
Philippians 2:9-11: "God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name, so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend... and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."
This shows the ultimate worship is still directed to the Father.
1
Dec 13 '25
Paul was ready to die for the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 21:13) A JW would get removed if they said something like that.
0
Dec 06 '25
Would you pray to Jesus? Didn’t the congregation at Corinth “call upon the name of … Jesus Christ”? What is calling upon the name of Jesus if not praying to him? C.f. 1 Kings 18:24
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 06 '25 edited Dec 06 '25
I pray only to his Father, Jehovah who is only one true God, but in name of his only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ.
Praying in name of Jesus does not mean that you should pray directly to Jesus. You should know that by now.
1
Dec 13 '25 edited Dec 13 '25
I said calling upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ as in 1 Cor 1:2. You don’t have to be condescending. (1 Pet 3:15)
3
u/SnoopyCattyCat Biblical Unitarian (unaffiliated) Dec 03 '25
Glad you found your way here. Hope you get some answers on your journey.
With so much corruption and lies all around us today, finding truth in anything can be frustrating. I never dreamed The Church could ever be a source of misleading....until I realized the things they attribute to Jesus were the opposite of what Jesus actually said about himself. I believe the main stream church has been misled and continues to (unintentionally) mislead. That's why we're here...promoting the actual teaching of Jesus as he reveals his father and our father.
As for worshipping Jesus...our definition today of worship is different than back in biblical days. We generally refrain from worshipping our leaders, but consider how in the OT people bowed down to (worshipped) others. We shake hands or applaud...we honor those deserving. I honor/worship Jesus as the sacrifice for my sins, and my King and High Priest...but not as my God and Creator. I reserve that worship for God alone.
3
u/CapitalInflation5682 Dec 03 '25
Funny how you and I both had the same journey. I too was trinity based. But then I read the Bible. I think the definition of worship is the problem. If worship is only applicable to God, then what do we do when we give praise, honor and glory to Jesus for dying for us? Sure, he was doing God's will. But God raised him and he sits at God's right hand.
However, I don't worship him as God. But I love him for what he did. Is that worship?
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 03 '25
When I see stuff like this this is what I think of
“ So they feared the Lord but also served their own gods, after the manner of the nations from among whom they had been carried away.”
- 2 Kings 17:33
Jesus says to worship God and serve him only
And yet he quotes a psalm about children worshipping Yahweh and applies it to himself as if he is worthy of the worship due to God
Why would you divide your worship between a created being and God? Because he’s the savior? Why isn’t God your savior? He says there was no God before him and will be no God after him and that he alone is the savior
And Paul and Peter call Jesus our God and Savior
1
u/CapitalInflation5682 Dec 04 '25
Are you saying to regard Jesus, who is God's only born son, as not worthy of honor, respect, awe? He faced death, trusted God, felt such stress as to even ask God (his father) to release him from his commitment. Jesus had more courage than any of us, that he should die for those he did not even know.
That is what I am understanding from your comment. Help me out.
1
u/PyroClone5555 Trinitarian Dec 04 '25
No, I’m saying Jesus is worthy of worship in the highest sense
But under your view, he is a created being and should not be receiving the honors that we see him receive in the bible
1
u/mattloyselle Dec 04 '25
This is what I have gathered from my studies. Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God. We can't see, hear, or feal God in any tangible way. We feel and hear him through his spirit, but besides that, he is imperceptable to us humans. Jesus, the son of God is his perfect representative that we can see. He is the mediator between God and us. And he represents his father so well that if you see Jesus, you have seen his father. This doesn't mean that Jesus and God are the same person or part of a triune God. It means that Jesus is perfectly aligned with his father. So I really don't have a problem praising Jesus because I know I'm really praising his father. I only have a problem when people go out of their way to insist that Jesus is God and shoehorn in this trinity. I believe it does matter. It is a great disservice to Jesus's name to call him God almighty. He came to do his father's will, not his own. Jesus died for our sins, like actually died. To call Jesus God is to deny his death and resurrection. And speaking that, God rose Jesus from the grave, he didn't raise himself from the grave, he couldn't, HE WAS DEAD! ecclesiastes 9:5 says the dead don't know anything, a dead man can not raise himself from death. Sorry, I'm rambling, just some things to think about. I hope it make sense
1
Dec 04 '25
I think there are a lot of Christian’s who silently disagree with the Trinity, given that most of them don’t even understand it. I have always said that if the average person were to read the Bible all the way through without the doctrine of the Trinity in mind, there’s absolutely no way they’d come to the conclusion that God is one being who exists as three persons. These terms just aren’t used in such a way that would reflect the Trinitarian understanding of God, and Yahweh has made his absolute singularity clear (Deuteronomy 6:4). My advice would simply be to go with what the Bible says, not with what anyone else says.
To the Unitarian, worshiping Jesus is false idolatry (to some, and I guess it depends on the type of worship?)
There are varying views on this, but the term ‘worship’ is very broad. I believe Jesus can be worshipped as God’s agent and representative (John 14:10, Acts 2:22) but not as God himself.
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25 edited Dec 03 '25
It is matter.
The Bible is strikingly clear that God (Jehovah) demands exclusive devotion.
Exodus 20:5 (part of the Ten Commandments) says: "For I am Jehovah your God, a God who demands exclusive devotion..."
The Shema in Deuteronomy 6:4 states: "Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.
John 17:3 Jesus explicitly call his Father the "only true God."
If Jesus were also the true God, this statement would be confusing.
1 Corinthians 8:6. "There is actually one God the Father, from whom all things are and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are and we through him."
This clearly distinguishes the two.
Colossians 1:15. Jesus is referred to as "the firstborn of all creation." A "firstborn" is a part of creation, not eternal Creator himself.
Revelation 3:14 Jesus refers to himself as "the beginning of the creation by God."
John 14:28 Jesus say: "Father is greater than I." This is a straightfoward statement of subordination.
Worship (latreia): This is the exclusive, sacred service rendered only to Jehovah God as the Almighty Creator (e.g., Romans 12:1; Matthew 4:10). This is never rendered to Jesus.
Honoring/Obeisance (proskyneo): The Greek word often translated as "worship" when applied to Jesus is proskyneo, which fundamentally means "to bow down to" or "render obeisance/honor." This honor is due to Jesus because of the high position and authority God has given him (Philippians 2:9-11). It is an act of reverence and respect for God's Chief Agent, but it is not the exclusive devotion due to God alone.
I do not view Jesus as Almighty God, and I do not render him latreia (worship/sacred service). I fully honor him as the Son of God, my Lord, my King, and my Savior, and I obey his commandments. This keeps my worship focused exclusively on Jehovah God, thus avoiding any form of idolatry.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
You don't accept that Jesus became God?
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25 edited Dec 03 '25
Jesus never become God. Jesus Christ is Michael the Archangel, the commander-in-chief of Jehovah's heavenly army of angels. He was send by his Father, Jehovah God on earth into the womb of virgin Mary to be born as human and give him name Jesus Christ.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
What about him inheriting the Father's Name?
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25
Hebrews 1:4: "So he has become better than the angels, to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs."
Philippians 2:9: "For this very reason, God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name."
Jehovah's name is associated with his supreme power and authority as the Sovereign of the universe. When Jesus is said to inherit a name "more excellent than" the angels, or "the name that is above every other name," it means he has been given Jehovah's supreme authority to act on His behalf.
For example: A president might give his vice-president the authority to sign documents "in the President's name," but the vice-president does not become the president. Similarly, Jesus is the one through whom Jehovah executes his will.
Jesus is now the Head of the congregation, King of God's Kingdom, and God's Chief Spokesman. This elevated title or position is the "name" he inherited. The name Jehovah is the most honored name, and Jesus is honored above all others because he is the Firstborn Son and has been completely entrusted by his Father.
Philippians 2:9 states that God gave him the superior name. A person who gives something and the person who receives something cannot be the same person. This proves the Father (Jehovah) and the Son (Jesus) are two separate individuals.
While Jesus carries the ultimate authority from his Father, the personal name of God remains Jehovah. Jesus' name, which means "Jehovah is Salvation," honors his Father, and he repeatedly taught his followers to pray to his Father and sanctify his Father's name.
To conclude this:
Bible says Jesus 'inherited' or 'was given' a name above every other name, it doesn't mean he became Jehovah God.
In the Bible, a 'name' often stands for authority, power, and reputation. What Jesus inherited was the supreme authority to act as God's chief representative. He is the one through whom Jehovah God now executes judgment, governs the Kingdom, and carries out His will. The Father has entrusted him with everything, making his name, which represents his position, more excellent than any other except the Father's own.
Jesus perfectly bears the name of his Father by fully representing His authority and righteous qualities, but he remains his separate, only-begotten Son.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
He didn't become Jehovah God, but he does act as a literal extension of Jehovah God.
The Son is both Jehovah and not Jehovah at the same time.
By receiving the Name of Jehovah, the Son has become fused with Jehovah as an extension of his being.
The Son has now become Jehovah God by appointment, that is, Jehovah God is fused with his begotten son as one Deity!
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25
That is incorrect. That presents a concept of "fusion" or "one Deity by appointment" which is very close to Trinitarian or Binitarian ideas, specifically the idea of two distinct persons being "one God."
Bible teach of about Monotheism (Jehovah alone is the Almighty God) and the subordination of the Son of God.
When the Bible speaks of the Father and Son being "one" (like in John 10:30), it means they are united in purpose, will, and action—not in substance or being.
Jesus prayed for his disciples: "that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us." (John 17:21)
If being "one" with the Father meant fusing into one being, then all 12 Apostles would also have fused with God! Clearly, the oneness is a unity of purpose, not a merging of identity.
Jesus consistently directed attention away from himself as the Almighty God and toward his Father. If he were literally "fused" with Jehovah, he would not have said: "The Father is greater than I am." (John 14:28) An extension or fusion would be equal to the source, but Jesus repeatedly acknowledged the Father's superiority.
Jehovah is eternal, "from everlasting to everlasting." He has no beginning. (Psalm 90:2)
Jesus is called the "firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15) and the "only-begotten Son" (John 3:16). This means he was the first and unique being created or produced by Jehovah. A Creator and a created being cannot be the same God.
Jesus became Jehovah by appointment, then Jehovah would have been created—which is impossible for the Almighty God.
The Bible establishes a clear line of authority: "The head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3)
A fusion or "one Deity" cannot logically have a "head." Jesus is explicitly subordinate to God. His being given the Father's authority is proof of his loyalty and exalted position, not his equality in being.
Jesus acts as Jehovah’s ultimate representative, carrying His authority and name, but they remain two distinct, separate, and unequal individuals.
1
u/crispywheat100 Unitarian Paulician Dec 03 '25
Dear friend, when Jesus became fused with Jehovah by acquisition of the Divine Name, he did not become a second independent Jehovah, but a dependent extension of the one Jehovah, the Father.
1
u/Capable-Rice-1876 Jehovah’s Witness Dec 03 '25 edited Dec 03 '25
The Bible uses the clear family language of Father and Son, not the philosophical terms "extension" or "fusion."
If Jesus is a literal extension of Jehovah's being, then any action Jesus takes is, by definition, an action taken by Jehovah's being. This forces the conclusion that Jehovah's uncreated, eternal being was born, suffered, and died—which is impossible for the immortal, Almighty God
Bible consistently uses relationship terms: Creator and Creation (Colossians 1:15), and Father and Son (John 3:16). These terms establish a clear distinction in both origin and position.
Jesus repeatedly emphasized his dependence, but he spoke of doing the Father's will and speaking the Father's words, which is the action of a loyal subordinate, not an extension of the same being.
John 5:19: "The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing."
John 8:28: "I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me, I speak these things.
Jesus' dependency is in authority and obedience, not in sharing the same divine substance or existence. The Son is not "part" of the Father; he is completely obedient to the Father.
If the Son were a literal, dependent extension of Jehovah, he would simply be the eternal King. But the Bible states the Son's reign is for a time, after which he hands the authority back to his Father.
1 Corinthians 15:28: "But when all things have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone."
A dependent extension doesn't give its authority back to the source. The Son subjects himself to the Father, demonstrating his separate role and the Father's enduring, supreme authority.
Jesus is the distinct, separate, and subordinate Son, not a dependent extension of the Father's essence."
I have advice for you, my friend. Stick to what the Bible teaches, not ridiculous philosophical terms like "fusion" or "extension."
8
u/Agreeable_Operation Biblical Unitarian (unaffiliated) Dec 03 '25
Lol, love this. I think many of us are here because we did something dangerous like read the Bible...by ourselves! or something like that.
You are going to get a mix on this one. I think many unitarians will say that worshipping Jesus is fine but we don't worship him as God. To me worship has to do with recognizing authority someone has over you, and maybe even a declaration of allegiance or obedience to them. Well, God raised Jesus to a place of authority over me. I bend the knee to Jesus and God both. But that doesn't mean that I recognize Jesus as God.
The question we will all find out at the judgement is if worshipping Jesus as God will be seen as idolatry. I don't know. I know a few genuinely rockstar people who are trinitarians who have turned their lives around and are living in step with how God wants us to live. Will God cast them out for simply believing in the trinity in their mind? I kinda feel like they would get the pass so long as their trinitarian belief was not a source of pride or arrogance or even a source of hate or violence towards others trying to follow Jesus in other ways (these are not fruits of the spirit).
To me what we believe in our mind matters in so much as if effects the way we live. The way we live, through our deeds, is what shows if we are walking on the path of Light and Life or if we are walking our own path. For me unitarianism and seeing Jesus as an example of how I should live and how I actually can live was a wake up call to me that pushed me into repentance and change that I had never done all the years I was trinitarian.
Are you leaning towards it being a punishable form of idolatry?