Trinity and Salvation

rrobs said:

How many sins we get before it's too late?

Click to expand...

Too late for what? forgiveness? I think you know the answer to that.

rrobs said:

Seems like someone would go nuts worrying about that all the time.

Click to expand...

I don't.

rrobs said:

Are we still under the law?

Click to expand...

No.

rrobs said:

I might remind you the scriptures say the law made no man perfect (Rom 3:20), whereas belief in Jesus did (Heb 10:14).

Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about the Law.

rrobs said:

One last thing, check out the first 3 verses in Galatians chapter 3. How do you take those?

Click to expand...

I've pretty much answered that with the above responses.

The Sermon in the Mount and the Parable of the Sheep & Goats both make it abundantly clear that Jesus was adamant about doing and not just having p.c. beliefs, and the apostles taught much the same. To me, the concept that one is supposedly "saved" just by having the right p.c. beliefs with nothing else expected I call "rocking-chair religion"-- so convenient and so wrong. Do you agree?

rrobs said:

Well, our salvation is one thing and our walk is another thing. I think the Epistles make it clear that salvation is by grace and not by works.

Eph 2:8-10,

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

Click to expand...

What Paul is referring to is works under the Law-- Jewish Law. Later on, he refers to faith w/o works as being like "cymbals clashing"-- just lotsa noise. And then he follows up with which is the greatest: faith, hope, or love, and we well know it's the latter.

"Love" in Koine Greek has no English counterpart that's summed up in just one word as it essentially is an active noun. IOW, one just doesn't have love-- one immerses themselves into God's compassion for all but also acts on that.

The bottom line: it's easy to believe in some things about Jesus, but "the narrow path" has it that one must believe in Jesus through beliefs and subsequent actions. If I truly love someone, I'm going to show it through my dedication to help them. How can I have "agape" if they suffer and I choose not to do anything to even try and help them?

rrobs said:

Maybe I've been running in the wrong circles, but I have been called everything from a murderer to a whore monger by otherwise loving Christians because I believe Jesus is the son of God and therefore not God Himself. I'll rethink my whole premise. Thanks for your encouragement!

This is all I know about getting saved,

Rom 10:9: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."

Click to expand...

So you are a Unitarian, I take it? Like Isaac Newton.

I find it bizarre that you should be called a murderer or a whoremonger for being a Unitarian. What logic do these people use for calling Unitarians those things? And I can only presume you live in the US Bible Belt, where particularly narrow-minded homespun versions of Protestantism are the norm. I cannot imagine such abuse anywhere in Europe.

blü 2 said:

The Trinity doctrine developed in the 3rd century and had its present form late in the 4th. The aim was to raise Jesus to the status of 'God' without being open to the charge of pagan polytheism.

The doctrine states: ‘The One God exists as three persons and one substance’ (Oxford Dict. of the Christian Church) also phrased, ‘In the unity of the Godhead there are Three Persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, these Three Persons being truly distinct one from another’ (Catholic Encyclopedia).

This means that none of the three persons is less than God, therefore each of the three persons is 100% of God. Which further means that the doctrine of the Trinity is incoherent ─ 100% + 100% + 100% = 300%, which necessarily means three gods.

This incoherence is acknowledged, not debated. OxDCC calls it ‘a mystery in the strict sense’ ie the doctrine ‘can neither be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed’. The Cath. Encl. calls it an ‘absolute mystery’: ‘An absolute mystery is a truth whose existence or possibility could not be discovered by a creature, and whose essence (inner substantial being) can be expressed by the finite mind only in terms of analogy, e.g. the Trinity’ (which comes to the same thing as the first but not so bravely put).

The Tanakh never mentions God as a Trinity.

The NT never mentions God as a Trinity.

Jesus never once claims to be God.

Jesus repeatedly >states that he is not God<, simply God's agent or envoy.

Not even Paul thinks Jesus is God. Paul thinks Yahweh is God and Jesus is Lord.

So it would seem rather odd for a follower of Jesus to ignore Jesus' own repeated message and think that Jesus required belief in the Trinity as an essential for salvation.

Perhaps the problem is that most Christians tend not to read their bibles critically, with the aim of understanding what is actually written, but rather know what they know of it through the pulpit ( a source not much famed for its objectivity).

Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, you are not even a Christian and yet you know who Jesus is. It's pretty simple, a son is a son, a father is a father, and the twain shall never be the same person.

Yes, the pulpit can be a problem. To the defense of trinitarians, it should be noted that for many hundreds of years one would be burned at the stake for not believing the trinity. I suppose that is a good motivation for believing in something that is really quite impossible. Do that long enough and the original truth becomes forgotten. Even Chairman Mao knew that!

metis said:

What Paul is referring to is works under the Law-- Jewish Law. Later on, he refers to faith w/o works as being like "cymbals clashing"-- just lotsa noise. And then he follows up with which is the greatest: faith, hope, or love, and we well know it's the latter.

"Love" in Koine Greek has no English counterpart that's summed up in just one word as it essentially is an active noun. IOW, one just doesn't have love-- one immerses themselves into God's compassion for all but also acts on that.

The bottom line: it's easy to believe in some things about Jesus, but "the narrow path" has it that one must believe in Jesus through beliefs and subsequent actions. If I truly love someone, I'm going to show it through my dedication to help them. How can I have "agape" if they suffer and I choose not to do anything to even try and help them?

Click to expand...

When Jesus was here and mentioned the narrow path, it was not available for anyone to have agape. Agape comes with the new birth which came on the day of Pentecost. We were saved, not by works, but by grace. Following the law is indeed a narrow path, so narrow in fact that absolutely nobody could stay on it, not one single person, with the notable exception of Jesus. Jesus conquered death, not any of us.

Rom 3:20,

Calling the path of the law narrow is a huge understatement.

Thanks to Jesus' work, we can now have the agape you mentioned. We no longer need the law because agape is far better. I don't need a law that says, "thou shalt not kill." I think it quite obvious I will not kill one whom I love. The same goes with stealing, lying, adultery and the rest of the ten commandments.

Rom 10:4,

Very simple assertion here. Christ ended the law. There are no longer ten commandments. There is not even one commandment. Nobody was made perfect by law. Perfection comes by grace (Heb 10:14). Once we are made perfect, we have the ability to love one another with agape love.

Furthermore, our flesh is not made one bit better by the new birth. It will absolutely continue to sin. It is as dead as it ever was. In fact the scriptures tell us to reckon it as dead (Rom 6:11). Why even think about something that died 2,000 years ago (Gal 2:20). Put your mind on Christ and don't even consider your flesh (Col 3:2). Your flesh will never act worthy, no matter how hard you try.

If you think you can somehow will your flesh into righteousness, I'd suggest a very careful reading of Romans chapter 7.

2ndpillar said:

By the way, where did the canon for the present books in the NT that you use come from? It came from the bishop of Alexandria, Athanasius, a guy who was present at the Council of Nicaea, who was a head cheerleader for the false Trinity dogma. The abominations keep coming (Revelation 17:5). And when did he release that canon? Oh, yeah, he released them on the pagan festival of Easter in 367 A.D..

Click to expand...

I think it fair to say that the people to whom Paul wrote did not need a Bishop to tell them the things Paul said were by divine inspiration (2 Tim 3:16). The people themselves made the so-called "cannon."

Faithofchristian said:

To answer your question,
You said ( Why would God not make a requirement to believe in the trinity as plain as the nose on one's face?)

All because God gave each individual a brain to think with, God is not going to do all your work for you.That means studying the Bible for ones self. Don't Waite to be spoon fed.
There are lot people as well as Christians that don't even have the slightest clue or idea what the bible actually does teaches or Confirm's.
There are things in the bible that are as plain as the nose on ones face.

In your speaking about the Trinity. Just how much more can Christ Jesus be about it, Than when he was speaking to the disciples, saying unto them "Go you therefore, teach all nation's, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" Matthew 28:19.

"For in him ( Jesus) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" Colossians 2:9.

There you have the Trinity, Father,Son,Holy Spirit.
How much more can that be plain as the nose on ones face.
So the requirement for salvation is to be baptized in the Father and Son and the Holy Spirit. For salvation.

Jesus in the speaking to the disciples saying unto them "If you had known me, you should have known my Father also,
and from here forth, you know him, and have seen him" John 14:7.

Note Jesus said ( and have seen him)
All because Jesus is God the Father.
How much more plainly does Jesus have to be, that it's as plain as the nose on ones face.

Here's a question for anyone, In the book of John 14:28---"Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I "

How is the Father greater than Jesus,
If Jesus is God the Father, how exactly does this work?
It's as plain as the nose on ones face.

Click to expand...

If you read my original post you would see I wasn't interested in debating the trinity itself. I didn't say I believed in the trinity or didn't believe in it. I was just looking for a verse that says one must believe in the trinity to be saved, which many Christians claim.

metis said:

Too late for what? forgiveness? I think you know the answer to that.

I don't.

No.

I wasn't talking about the Law.
I've pretty much answered that with the above responses.

The Sermon in the Mount and the Parable of the Sheep & Goats both make it abundantly clear that Jesus was adamant about doing and not just having p.c. beliefs, and the apostles taught much the same. To me, the concept that one is supposedly "saved" just by having the right p.c. beliefs with nothing else expected I call "rocking-chair religion"-- so convenient and so wrong. Do you agree?

Click to expand...

Forgive me, but I'm getting mixed signals from you. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. On the one hand you seem to say, as I believe, we are saved by grace. Then you seem to be saying that once we are saved we must follow some type of law or another in order to stay saved. Are you saying that once we are saved by Jesus' work we can somehow undue that work and lose our salvation? I think that is what you are saying. I was just asking how many sins we can commit before the work he did is nullified and we are no longer saved. Remember, God has already seated us on His right hand along with Jesus (Eph 2:6). Are you suggesting God will suddenly realize He made a mistake and kick us out of heaven?

A lot of confusion can be avoided by realizing that everything Jesus said was to Israel under the law. It was obviously before his death and resurrection. What, if anything, do you think changed after Jesus ascended to the Father?

exchemist said:

So you are a Unitarian, I take it? Like Isaac Newton.

I find it bizarre that you should be called a murderer or a whoremonger for being a Unitarian. What logic do these people use for calling Unitarians those things? And I can only presume you live in the US Bible Belt, where particularly narrow-minded homespun versions of Protestantism are the norm. I cannot imagine such abuse anywhere in Europe.

Click to expand...

Yes, I am Unitarian and I do live in the US, though not the Bible belt. I didn't realize it was so different in Europe.

As a result of my post, I've come to see that I have exaggerated my claim that 99% of Christians believe the trinity must be accepted to be saved. I've been most pleasantly surprised to learn I was wrong about that. Thanks for your encouragement!

rrobs said:

I think it fair to say that the people to whom Paul wrote did not need a Bishop to tell them the things Paul said were by divine inspiration (2 Tim 3:16). The people themselves made the so-called "cannon."

Click to expand...

2 Timothy 3:16 was written supposedly by Paul. It was in regards to the 2 Timothy 3:15, "sacred writings" "you have learned from childhood", which would be the OT, which would not include any of your NT writings.

2ndpillar said:

2 Timothy 3:16 was written supposedly by Paul. It was in regards to the 2 Timothy 3:15, "sacred writings" "you have learned from childhood", which would be the OT, which would not include any of your NT writings.

Click to expand...

I'm curious. Paul delivered the message that we are saved by grace and not by following the law. Unless you know something I don't know (which is always possible), Jesus never said that. While he was here the law was still in effect. The narrow path is that of law, not of grace.

My question for you is are we saved by grace or by works? Thanks...

rrobs said:

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding. On the one hand you seem to say, as I believe, we are saved by grace. Then you seem to be saying that once we are saved we must follow some type of law or another in order to stay saved.

Click to expand...

The only type of "law" is to obey what Jesus and the apostles taught us to do.

rrobs said:

Are you saying that once we are saved by Jesus' work we can somehow undue that work and lose our salvation?

Click to expand...

Absolutely, as the Parable of the Seed & Sower points out. It is unfathomable that "once saved, always saved" is somehow correct as that's not posited by both Jesus' words nor Paul's, the latter of which tells his followers to try and help those whom have fallen away to get back on the right track. Obviously "fallen away" means they lost their faith, as the Parable of the Seed & Sower says, and they need to be encouraged to get back on the narrow path.

rrobs said:

Are you suggesting God will suddenly realize He made a mistake and kick us out of heaven?

Click to expand...

How in the world did you get that out of what I wrote?

rrobs said:

What, if anything, do you think changed after Jesus ascended to the Father?

Click to expand...

Probably not much since he already said that his Kingdom was at hand when he preached.

Anyhow, we are having trouble communicating, so I'm going to end this with you simply by saying that my position is that Jesus taught us what to believe in and do, and I do believe in what he said about that. As far as being "saved", I really don't worry about that as all I'm trying to do is to believe in what he taught and follow what he has preached. Jesus brought us the "law of love" ("agape"), and I do believe we should accept and follow it, not just by belief but also by our actions in following what he and the Twelve taught. Anything short of that is very dangerous to our faith.

Take care and have a great weekend, and maybe we can get around to discuss some other things some day.

rrobs said:

So let's see some scriptures that make belief in the trinity a requirement for salvation.

Click to expand...

"Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name (singular - 1 God) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (plural - 3 Divine Persons)" -Matthew 28:19.

"He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned" -Mark 16:16

metis said:

The only type of "law" is to obey what Jesus and the apostles taught us to do.

Absolutely, as the Parable of the Seed & Sower points out. It is unfathomable that "once saved, always saved" is somehow correct as that's not posited by both Jesus' words nor Paul's, the latter of which tells his followers to try and help those whom have fallen away to get back on the right track. Obviously "fallen away" means they lost their faith, as the Parable of the Seed & Sower says, and they need to be encouraged to get back on the narrow path.

How in the world did you get that out of what I wrote?

Probably not much since he already said that his Kingdom was at hand when he preached.

Anyhow, we are having trouble communicating, so I'm going to end this with you simply by saying that my position is that Jesus taught us what to believe in and do, and I do believe in what he said about that. As far as being "saved", I really don't worry about that as all I'm trying to do is to believe in what he taught and follow what he has preached. Jesus brought us the "law of love" ("agape"), and I do believe we should accept and follow it, not just by belief but also by our actions in following what he and the Twelve taught. Anything short of that is very dangerous to our faith.

Take care and have a great weekend, and maybe we can get around to discuss some other things some day.

Click to expand...

Sounds good. I'll be around. Take care...

rrobs said:

As a result of my post, I've come to see that I have exaggerated my claim that 99% of Christians believe the trinity must be accepted to be saved. I've been most pleasantly surprised to learn I was wrong about that. Thanks for your encouragement!

Click to expand...

The Trinity appears to be a fun discussion topic on the forums...always sure to attract a crowd with images of 3 headed monsters and such. It's difficult to find another doctrine that has been more misrepresented about the traditional, historic Christian church.

I'm not aware of any Trinitarian churches who claim the Trinity is necessary for salvation either, but with so many churches around one can always do a bit of shopping.

Anna Therese said:

"Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name (singular - 1 God) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (plural - 3 Divine Persons)" -Matthew 28:19.

"He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned" -Mark 16:16

Click to expand...

You cut your quote short. Mark 16:15-18, "go into all the world and preach the gospel" "and these signs will accompany those who have believed: "in my name they shall cast out demons, and they will speak with new tongues; they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poisons, it shall not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover". Is this scenario any part of your life? Maybe one should be careful on what peg they hang their lives on (Isaiah 22:25).

rrobs said:

I'm curious. Paul delivered the message that we are saved by grace and not by following the law. Unless you know something I don't know (which is always possible), Jesus never said that. While he was here the law was still in effect. The narrow path is that of law, not of grace.

My question for you is are we saved by grace or by works? Thanks...

Click to expand...

The "narrow" " way" leading to "life" (Matthew 7:13-14), is to keep the commandments (Matthew 19:17). The "broad" "way" to "destruction" is to follow the "false prophets", who are "ravenous wolves" dressed as sheep. (Matthew 7:15-23) who "practice lawlessness".

2ndpillar said:

Now can you interpret what you spoke, or you just sowing confusion? One of my friends was Assembly of God, and she apparently spoke in tongues, but was caused to stumble (Matthew 18:6) by her church and its teachings, and wound up in hell (New Jersey).

Click to expand...

Speaking in tongues means to speak in other languages. Paul know Greek, Hebrew etc.

These people with their fake 'speaking in tongues' are misguided.
The whole term speaking in tongues is middle eastern, tongues is just another word for a language of another nation.


The Apostles were speaking in tongues. It means that with Gods miracle they were being heard in the languages of foreigners.
Try to understand the 'speaking in tonguers'. You will hear an instable person who is misguided. Can't believe how dumb people can be.

rrobs said:

If you read my original post you would see I wasn't interested in debating the trinity itself. I didn't say I believed in the trinity or didn't believe in it. I was just looking for a verse that says one must believe in the trinity to be saved, which many Christians claim.

Click to expand...

Well I gave you what Christ Jesus said to the disciples to go and teach all nation's, baptizing them in the name of Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 28:19--"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"

There you have the Trinity. Father,Son, Holy Spirit.

Colossians 2:9--"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily"

Here you have Trinity, the Godhead, which is the Father,Son,Holy Spirit.

Baptizing is a profession of one's faith in believing in the Father,Son and Holy Spirit as being all one, For in the body of Jesus dwells all fullness of the Godhead, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
All three being God himself.

Faithofchristian said:

Well I gave you what Christ Jesus said to the disciples to go and teach all nation's, baptizing them in the name of Father and of the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 28:19--"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost"

There you have the Trinity. Father,Son, Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Like Larry, Curley, and Moe? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, but just because there are three of something doesn't make them somehow one.

It is noteworthy that not once did the apostles apply the formula of Matt 28:19 anywhere in the book of Acts. Maybe they weren't around when Jesus said that. Besides, there is no hint whatsoever that the three things Jesus mentioned were somehow one thing. It must be a preconceived idea.

Colossians 2:9--"For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily"

Here you have Trinity, the Godhead, which is the Father,Son,Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Where? How do you get a trinity, three in one, from the words "fullness of the Godhead?"

Eph 3:19,

Does that make us a trinity? I'm afraid this is another case where something is read into the scriptures that just isn't there.

Baptizing is a profession of one's faith in believing in the Father,Son and Holy Spirit as being all one, For in the body of Jesus dwells all fullness of the Godhead, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
All three being God himself.

Click to expand...

Here is how I, as well as every other born again believer, was baptized:

Acts 1:5,

The words "the Holy Ghost" are not really accurate according to the Greek texts. For one thing there is no definite article, "the." The capital "H" and "G" are not accurate either. In the Greek all letters are capitalized, so it it the transcribers idea to make some small letters and some capital. The Greek words are, "pneuma agion" and should be translated, "holy spirit." The same Greek words are translated that way in many other places. The word "with" is the Greek word "en" which should be translated "in."

Putting it all together, this verse should be translated, "...ye shall be baptized in holy spirit." Holy spirit is God's gift to us. It is precisely that which makes us "born again." It is that gift of holy spirit that repairs the broken fellowship caused by Adam's sin. The natural man has no spirit and hence can not communicate directly with God who is spirit. When we get the spirit we once again have a direct connection with God. This truth was foretold by Jesus in the gospel of John.

John 14:23,


In any case, there is not hint within the text itself of Acts 1:5, even the poorly translated KJV version, that suggests God is three in one. Again, that has to be a preconceived idea read into the text.