Talk:Unitarianism

Contrast with Nontrinitarianism

We have separate pages for Unitarianism and Nontrinitarianism. Either they should be merged or the distinction should be made a lot clearer here, considering that the first line contrasts with trinitarianism. The Enlightened (talk) 20:49, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

There are a great many divergent nontrinitarian theologies, including Arianism (the Son is God, but was created and is not eternal), Sabellianism (the three Persons exist, but are different aspects or modes of a single being) and Adoptionism (Jesus was a mortal until he was elevated to godhood), just to name three of the major ones. Unitarianism is a specific form of nontrinitarianism; like these other forms, unitarianism represents a distinct thread of Christian belief with its own history. I see no reason to combine this article with the other one. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 02:05, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Person vs Being

Recently there have been a couple of edits that expressed disagreement with the word "person" to describe what there are three of in the Trinity or what there is one of in the Unity. The Trinity says that there are three hypostases (persons) in one ousia (being). I am perfectly aware that in the minds of many, there really isn't a difference between a person and a being, but in the Trinity there is. Unitarians have rejected the idea that there are three persons in one being and instead argue that God is one person and one being. Hence the "unit" in the word "Unitarian." Because Unitarians developed their Christology in contradistinction to the Trinity, they always have, and could only, use the words "person" and "being" when comparing their beliefs to those of Trinitarians. So if these terms are rejected, then a contrast between Trinitarianism and Unitarianism is no longer possible. I am also aware that in the minds of some a "person" must necessarily be a human. So they have expressed a preference for "being." But if that word is used, then Unitarians are now in agreement with Trinitarians, because Trinitarians also believe that God is one being. No more difference between the two. Anyway, a person does not have to be a human. If we ever meet an intelligent life form from another planet, I am certain we will apply the word "person" to them just as much as to us. --Donbodo (talk) 03:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Since Unitarianism does not believe in the Trintarian belief of three persons in one God, and that they do not believe that Jesus Christ is God. Shouldn't the definition stating they are under the Christian banner be deleted?? If Unitiarianism doesn't believe in Jesus Christ as True God and Trud Man, then they are not Christian. Betrue2011 (talk) 23:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)Betrue2011

A Christian is a disciple or follower of Christ. Unitarians are such. --Donbodo (talk) 21:12, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson

Thomas Jefferson was recently removed from the list of American Presidents. His inclusion is controversial because he was never a member of a Unitarian congregation, but he did express sympathies in his writings. Unitarians frequently claim him as one of them.

I know that in a letter to Benjamin Waterhouse, Jefferson wrote, "I am anxious to see the doctrine of one god commenced in our state. But the popul’n of my neighb’hood is too slender, and is too much divided into other sects to maintain any one preacher well. I must therefore be contented to be an Unitarian by myself, although I know there are many around me who would become so, if once they could hear the questions fairly stated." And George Tucker, a professor at the University of Virginia when Jefferson was associated with it, wrote, "In the last years of his life, when questioned by any of his friends on this subject, he used to say he was 'an Unitarian.'" --Mac OS X 07:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Creed

The creed is referenced to Summa Universae Theologiae Christianae secundum Unitarios but that article doesn't depict the content of the document.

As I understand from this and some other articles Unitarianism holds the beliefs below:

• There is only one god.
• Jesus is not a god.
• Jesus is a human being.
• Jesus is a prophet.

What I can't find are those below:

1. Jesus was born via virgin birth (he doesn't have a biological human father) (?)
2. Jesus is not the son of god (?)

Could someone please confirm if the first 4 are true and please indicate the position of Unitarianism for 1 and 2?

It is also necessary to put those information in the article to make it clear about the beliefs of Unitariansim.--98.196.232.128 (talk) 07:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Unitarianism was simpler when it was strictly Socinian, but once American Unitarians came into the picture, Arian belief became a part of Unitarianism. So this means that some Unitarians believe in Jesus as a powerful spirit before and after his human life. Also most Unitarians accept that Jesus was the "Son of God," but they have different opinions as to what that means. Some of them do accept the virgin birth, but I think most do not. --Don Bodo (talk) 22:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

If 4 is right, shouldn't Islam also be included as a branch of Unitarianism, probably historically related with Arianism? 41.139.185.58 (talk) 01:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC) Mortran

Of course not. No one classifies Islam as a branch of Unitarianism or vice versa. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:42, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Unitarianism is Christian, so Jesus, as prophet, is the prophet par excellence, and not Muhammad, as Muslims believe. --Don Bodo (talk) 16:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Unitarianism, and its meaning

There have been a number of edits recently to change the lede, one to eliminate the adjective "Christian" and twice now to change the "bolded name" (which is always the article title) to Unitarian Christianity. I would like to address these edits.

This article is specifically about the set of Christian theological doctrines distinct from Trinitarianism. It is not about the beliefs or doctrines of the Unitarian Universalist Association, nor is it about the broader pan-theological body of thought which has grown out from the UUA. Those other topics are addressed adequately in other articles. We can certainly link to those other articles, but the article itself should retain its current, narrow focus. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 17:00, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Added: I went back to look at this article, and saw that there is a link to the disambiguation page already, right at the top of the article, between the page title and the lede. I would think this is sufficient. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 17:02, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed move

I feel this article needs to be moved to something like Unitarianism (Christian Theology). Unitarianism in many countries, such as the UK, refers mainly to the religious movement known as "Unitarian Universalism" in the USA.80.231.172.154 (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Disagree Such a move offers no clarification, and any potential confusion is already addressed by the headnote referring to the disambiguation page. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 15:15, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Agree I am a British Unitarian and it seems very wrong that most people looking up our religion automatically get taken to Christian Unitarianism. Unless one page is clearly dominant, then the disambiguation page should be the first place people are taken to. The Enlightened (talk) 15:20, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Query I was involved in this page years ago. I agree that the situation, then and now, is not ideal. Is there a way to examine the logs, and see readers' click-trails? There must be some way to measure whether we are making the public's job easier for them or more difficult. Can the average reader quickly find what they were coming for, or do they hop around in despair and confusion? Wikipedia must collect data on this sort of thing. Interpreting it intelligently is another matter. BrainyBabe (talk) 16:06, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

I believe there are ways of doing this, but Wikipedia's policy is that the term should go to a disambiguation page unless there is clearly a primary topic Wikipedia:Disambiguation. That does not seem to be the case with the Christian theology. The Enlightened (talk) 22:41, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Agree I'm Canadian and Unitarianism means the non-Christian religion here.