A reversion to the Christianity of the original apostles understandings would be ideal. However, given how many denominations there already are in Christianity today, it's not an easy path.
Typically an adoptionist is someone who denies the virgin birth. If you affirm the virgin birth, you share that in common with the dynamic monarchians Gaston identifies in his survey of early Christians. The specific details about the miraculous origin of Jesus within Mary are another topic. (Exactly HOW God brought about the conception, for example.)
Me too. Jesus himself said that you become the children of God at the resurrection. Paul says that the resurrection is the adoption for human beings. Obviously this this applies equally to the resurrected Messiah as well. And this doesn’t have to mean that he wasn’t the son of God in another lesser sense both at his baptism as well at his conception. For me, the virgin birth miracle was the token of his identity. The spirit filled baptism was the authoritative seal. The resurrection was the realization of the complete messianic authority. All that remains is for him to return and fulfill all the prophecies concerning his earthly rule and reign. But he will gain no higher authority than he now has at the right hand of God. It’s similar for all his disciples. At baptism the covenant is made. The Holy Spirit ratifies the covenant whereby we come into a relationship with God as his children on condition. The resurrection is the realization of the promised inheritance as sons of God, the messiah being the firstborn from the dead. Partaking in the divine nature means you inherit the divine attribute of immortality through the resurrection from the dead. This doctrine is from the scriptures and there is no shame in it.
@@UnitarianChristianAlliance Thank you. I simply believe the words of Peter in Acts 2:30 (and the prophecies of 2 Sam 7:12 and 1 Chr 17:11) and take them VERY literally. I am enjoying reading the book.
The point is that your interpretation of those two passages is later than an earlier unitarian interpretation. Basically history demonstrates you are misreading the text.
@@UnitarianChristianAlliance My mistake. Lucky you. I confused you with the UU Christian Fellowship. Outsiders in what was once their "church." (The historical logic of liberalism)