Can you be saved and reject the Trinity?

[paxigoth7]

yes.

 

[Khristeeanos]

Many people believe in Jesus. All the cults believe in Jesus.

They just have the wrong Jesus.

 

[Eve777]

God is a trinity that is just the way it is. To deny the very nature of God is to deny God, himself.

Is it?


In Acts 11:26 we are told the disciples of Jesus were "called Christians first in Antioch." If this be so, how could they be called Christians who knew nothing of the theological Trinity which did not become defined until the fifth century? How is it that those who believe in the Father, the Son and the holy Spirit are not recognized as Christians today if they say they do not believe the "incomprehensible" Trinity?

 

[evanman]

The truth that Jesus is God, the Son, is told in the scriptures.

We also know from first and second century writings that Christians believed in the Triune nature of the Godhead. Even from Jewish sources the concept of a triune Godhead was held in some Jewish quarters.

Just because these things were codified at Nicea does not nullify the teaching.

 

[DM]

The truth that Jesus is God, the Son, is told in the scriptures.

The truth that Jesus is, rather, "Son of God" is told in the Scriptures. It seems very easy to throw terms around like "God, the Son", or "God, the Holy Spirit", when Scripture never uses such arrangements. There is not one time where you will ever find the arrangement "God, the Son", in all of Scripture. Whereas you will find numerous statements of "Son of God".

Just want to clarify that.

Sincerely,
David

 

[DivineNames]

Good points. My question was intended for those who have heard about the Trinity and come to understand it but then still reject it. Sorry if my question did not imply that…perhaps I should go by advice I have given to others…don’t assume anything.

How many people understand the Trinity? Can it be understood?

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

Good points. My question was intended for those who have heard about the Trinity and come to understand it but then still reject it. Sorry if my question did not imply that…perhaps I should go by advice I have given to others…don’t assume anything.

How many people understand the Trinity? Can it be understood?

There is no way I could possibliy answer the first question. As for the second, yes it can be understood...I understand it.

 

[DM]

Just more food for thought.

(Just throwing some thoughts out here - not responding to anyone in particular).

I’ve often heard Trinitarian viewpoints that describe the “three persons of the Godhead†as being “co-equal†and “co-eternalâ€Â. That is to say, that in principle – there’s an inextricable link between these “three persons†who make up the “one Godâ€Â.

As the end of the song “Holy, Holy, Holy†concludes (and, even as the very title suggests), “God in three persons, blessed Trinity!†The angels around the throne of God shout out, “Holy! Holy! Holy!†(cf. Isaiah 6:3 – for example). A three-fold declaration of the Holiness of God. Never-the-less, a three-fold statement doesn’t necessitate a “Triune nature†in anything, anymore than one could say that the middle-east should be similarly construed as a three-fold piece of Real Estate when Jeremiah says:

Jeremiah 22:29 “Oh land, land, land, hear the word of the LORD!â€Â

When I hear statements about the “three-part nature of God†and how there is “co-equality†and “co-eternity†between the “three persons†. . . I’m left astonished by that when Jesus bluntly says:

Luke 10:22 “All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.â€Â

What about the Holy Spirit? Doesn’t HE know who the Son and Father are? In fact, when Jesus gives us the very definition of “eternal life†. . . the “Holy Spirit†is noticeably absent:

John 17:3 “Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.â€Â

What about knowing the Holy Spirit? Why doesn’t Jesus say anything about that in the definition of eternal life? Moreover, it is only with great difficulty that one can assume Jesus to be God when he fully admits the following statement:

John 7:16,17 “Jesus answered, ‘My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. If anyone chooses to do God’s will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.â€Â

Now, it’s extremely interesting that Jesus does not use the language construct as to whether or not his teaching comes from “his Father†- But, rather plainly, he suggests that one will find out whether his teaching comes “from God†. . . or, “whether I speak on my own.†The clear distinction is between Jesus and God. (i.e. not between Jesus and “the Father†– in those terms).

Jesus even goes on to clarify that, not only does he not speak on his own, but that his Fater commanded him what to say, and even, HOW to say it:

John 12:49 “For I did not speak of my own accord, but the Father who sent me commanded me what to say and how to say it.â€Â

My point, is simply to say . . . that there are other ways to look at Jesus that do not compromise his status as God’s ONLY begotten son (cf. John 3:16), and man’s ONLY means of salvation (cf. Acts 4:12).

Peace in Him,
David

 

[evanman]

The Holy Spirit is not absent from the Scriptures.

The role of the Holy Spirit is to convict of sin and to lead people into all truth.

He does not seek to be exalted but to exalt Christ.

There is such a thing called "Pneumacentricity". this is the exaltation of the Holy Spirit, placing the Holy Spirit at the centre and/or forefront of everything.

Too many 2christians" have fallen prey to this.

 

[DivineNames]

How many people understand the Trinity? Can it be understood?

There is no way I could possibliy answer the first question. As for the second, yes it can be understood...I understand it.

[The Athanasian creed] is usually not now said in churches. One reason for this is suggested by my experience the last, and only, time I tried to get an Anglican congregation to recite it aloud in church. When they got to the phrase, "the Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible ..... and yet there are not three incomprehensibles", they all burst out laughing. The whole thing was just too incomprehensible, and so the Trinity still seems to many people. (K.Ward)



You may be able to understand it, but it seems not all Christians can.

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

You may be able to understand it, but it seems not all Christians can.

Just so you know I don't understand everything about God but that does not matter...I believe not on understanding but on Faith. Faith is what saves us not our understanding.

 

[Free]

The whole thing was just too incomprehensible, and so the Trinity still seems to many people. (K.Ward)

Of course, just because something is incomprehensible doesn't mean that it's false, just difficult or impossible to comprehend.

 

[evanman]

Probably down to the translation I would think.

Or maybe the congregation were Greeks,

1Co 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;

 

[DivineNames]

an evangelical theologian's view-


"Christianity has always been obliged to explain the Trinity by positing a level of objective reality in God which is not governed by simplicity. This distinction has failed to penetrate Judaism, and it has been decisively rejected by Islam, so that both these religions, and especially the latter, tend to regard Christianity as a form of concealed polytheism. Both cling to the belief that true monotheism means the worship of a God who is a simple being. To this Christians reply that we worship not the essence of God, but his persons. Of course, both Jews and Muslims would say that God is personal, but in their understanding, personhood is really an attribute of the divine essence. Christianity denies this, maintaining that the persons are subsistent realities in their own right. At the level of person, which is the point at which we enter into relationship with God, Christians insist that there is a plurality in unity, which is not to be confused with the simplicity of God's impersonal essence."



"Calvin was very reluctant to say anything about God's essence, and concentrated instead on saying that we know God only through his persons... Calvin's position seems to us to be fundamentally sound, both because it makes the right distinction between what is knowable and what is unknowable in God, and because it insists that what is knowable can be understood only in the context of a personal relationship with him. Calvin's position also managed to retain a proper concern for God's unknowable being, something which is in danger of being forgotten today."


(G.Bray)

 

[DivineNames]

Meister Eckhart-


"God has wrought one act eternally in which act he made the soul in his own (likeness),, and out of which act and by means of which act the soul issued forth into her created existence, becoming unlike God and estranged from her own prototype...

and in her creation she made God, who was not before the soul was made.. I am the cause that God is God. God is gotten of the soul, his Godhead of himself; before creatures were, God was not God albeit he was Godhead which he gets not from the soul."


(I believe the term "Godhead" is being used for the divine essence, and the term "God" for the Trinity)

 

[DivineNames]

Probably down to the translation I would think.

Or maybe the congregation were Greeks,

Yeah right.

 

[Rose of Sharon]

RoS,

God manifests HIMSELF in many differnt ways, but he does NOT manifest HIMSELF as other "divinities".

So you don't believe then that the Holy Spirit or Jesus are God.

[quote:22d49]Jesus was NOT the word, GOD was and is the word. GOD became flesh ( John 1:14) and that was Jesus Christ in the FORM of God.

The Word was the Son who became Jesus as God in the flesh.

Jesus was not and is not "another" divine person in the godhead. Jesus is litterly God. There are not two divinitys in God and Jesus.

And yet Jesus himself said he would send "another" (John 14:16). Either you are wrong or Jesus is wrong.

But when we speak of Jesus, it is in the humanity sense, not divine...Jesus is litterly God.

And here is the Jesus with dissociative identity disorder. Please tell me RoS, if we speak of Jesus in the "humanity sense," how is it that you can say he is lilterally God? You are essentially saying that his humanity is God.[/quote:22d49]

************************
The Holy spirit IS God , and Jesus was and is God IN THE FLESH. God is spirit, hence ....... the Holy Spirit, so what does that make Jesus? Jesus was a man , full blooded man with a soul , a consiousness just like us, but he was and is also God HIMSELF. Thats where Col. 2:9 comes in.

The word was and is NOT the Son. The word was and is God. The Son was not here until he was born of Mary.

John 14:16-20; Read alittle more, see verse 18;
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 (I) will not leave you comfortless ( I ) will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.


When Jesus says " another comforter" he doesn't mean " another divine person " , he means that since he, as Jesus, the man, " physically " will not be here anymore, that he will send himself in the spirit to comfort us. Thats why we have the Holyghost .

There is really no human side and no divine side to Jesus. Jesus was ALL man, flesh and blood. That sounds like two, no, Jesus was a man with ALL fullness of the Godhead BODILY.............
God came HIMSELF , the incarnation did not produce " another" individual in Jesus Christ, That was God , IN THE FLESH.

 

[Rose of Sharon]

Rose of Sharon,

[quote="Rose of Sharon":2e4ba]There is ONE God, nowhere in the word says a trinity, nor a threefold gospel. The Jews did not beleive in it nor did the Apostles. They taught ONE God. Constantine and his council brought in the trinity beleif.

There is one God; the Trinity does not deny that. The concept known as the Trinity is found is scripture; the word itself is not in the Bible because such a word did not exist when it was written.

I do not deny the father, the son, nor the Holyghost. They are titles of God, not a trinity. God manifests HIMSELF in many differnt ways, but he does NOT manifest HIMSELF as other "divinities".

Interesting. Look at this:
Refer back what I posted in the "No pre-existant Jesus:â€Â
The plurality of God in the Old and New Testament

Once you have read that then please explain to me how words like "us" and "our" could be referring to a God that is not three persons in one but one God with only one person.[/quote:2e4ba]

********************************

To Whom was God speaking? Was the Father speaking to the Son? Or was the Son speaking to the Father? Was it the Holy Ghost speaking to the "other two"? Is there a proper interpretation of this verse which does not divide God into separate persons?

The scripture plainly states in Deut. 6:4, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" And in Eph. 4:5, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism,".

"God," in Genesis chapter one, comes from the Hebrew, "Elohim."

Elohim refers not to the Trinity in three persons, but to the fulness of the Godhead as ONE God, manifested in the fulness of His powers and attributes, both moral and natural.

 

[Nocturnal_Principal_X]

To Whom was God speaking? Was the Father speaking to the Son? Or was the Son speaking to the Father? Was it the Holy Ghost speaking to the "other two"? Is there a proper interpretation of this verse which does not divide God into separate persons?

The scripture plainly states in Deut. 6:4, "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:" And in Eph. 4:5, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism,".

"God," in Genesis chapter one, comes from the Hebrew, "Elohim."

Elohim refers not to the Trinity in three persons, but to the fulness of the Godhead as ONE God, manifested in the fulness of His powers and attributes, both moral and natural.

Consider the following:

If Jesus is God, then who did He pray to?

Is there a proper interpretation of this verse which does not divide God into separate persons?

No there is not. God is comprised of three “persons†that make ONE God. Even the Bible speaks of this…just look at the follow post about “The plurality of God in the Old and New Testamentâ€Â:

The plurality of God in the Old and New Testament

Until you can explain away that then and only then can anyone say God is not a Trinitarian God.

 

[Eve777]

The plurality of God in the Old Testement

Who was he talking to? Well, Who was there? In whose image?

The "host of heaven" The original Hebrew word most-often translated as "host," whether referring to stars, or angels, is (pronounced) tsaw-baw and means a great mass, or a massive organization - appropriate, since there are a vast number of both stars and angels.


"I saw The Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by Him on His right hand and on His left." (1 Kings 22:19 KJV)

"And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying, Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men." (Luke 2:13-14 KJV)

"Thou, even Thou, art Lord alone; Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein, the seas, and all that is therein, and Thou preservest them all; and the host of heaven worshippeth Thee." (Nehemiah 9:6 KJV)


"When did God create the angels you may ask?
Job 38:4-7 describes the angels worshipping God as He was creating the world – “Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone - while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for joy?†(Job 38:4-7).

So, although the Bible does not specifically say when God created the angels, it was sometime before the world was created. Whether this was a day before, or a thousand years before, we cannot be sure.