Do you have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian?

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

You made that up.

For those who don't know, the "magisterium" is all the Churches bishop's, considered as a single body; when the Holy Catholic Church teach's on matter's of faith, doctrine and moral's, it is the magisterium who is teaching.
Speak for yourself. I myself find it confusing and have found it confusing, and thats whether or not I believed in the Trinity, which I haven't alway's. Now that doesn't matter if I'm not particularly intelligent, so instead of that anecdote, I offer up the wide disparity on this board among those of us who accept the Scripture as the Word of God, in what we each contend about the nature of God, based on our own understanding of the Scripture. This is objective proof that it is confusing, regardless of you're own personal experience, which is just another anecdote like my own personal experience.
See above. This is anecdotal evidence for you're position. True evidence is surveying the wide disparity's between what a number of people --all of whom believe the Scripture to be the Word of God --believe about the nature of God, and concluding honestly that the subject must be confusing, because otherwise we'd all agree.
Fine. Show me a chart with how many time's in Scripture that Jesus is called "Lord" versus how many time's David is called "Lord." Is it more or less than 1,000-to-1?
According to some people, yes they're is. See above. This is 1 of the example's of the different view's that people who accept the Bible as the Word of God put forth to explain the nature of God.

I myself see the distinction, so therefore the Holy Spirit is not the Father. But the Holy Spirit is God.
I fail to see the relevance of this question, given that you made up that the Bible is to be heeded, even over what all the Churches bishop's teach in unison.
I am not 1 with the Father. John 10:30 KJV

John 14:6 KJV
I believe the Trinity should be taught as the truth, regardless of whatever bearing believing in the Trinity has on 1s salvation.
I disagree with you're rendering of that passage. I would suggest that its more like this:

16 For God [the Father] so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God [the Father] sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God [the Father].​

Its not so confusing. You're version reveal's some of you're own self-imposed confusion however, coming from you're stubbornness in rejecting what the Churches pastor has been teaching from Pentecost.


DJ

1.0
​

Could you please do a bit of English grammar research and learn how to properly write plurals as contrasted with possessives in regard to the use of apostrophes?

It's really difficult to constantly read illiterate posts with such horrible misuses.

Other illiteracy is your constant conflation of you're and your, and there and their. Eek.

 

[Cruciform]

I would say that a Trinitarian is always an idolater.

The simple fact is that neither your nor my doctrinal opinion has any binding authority whatsoever. Rather, it is the formal teachings of Christ's one historic Church which interpret Divine Revelation and formulate doctrine in a manner which is binding upon believers. Thus it has always been, and thus it is now. What you and I think is entirely irrelevant.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Bright Raven]

Scripture supports Trinitarian doctrine.

1 John 5:7 Modern English Version (MEV)

7 There are three who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three are one.

 

[oatmeal]

Who, besides YOU, ever claimed that The Father was The Son in the first place?!

Only a Trinity-ignorant would have made such a sophomoric gaff.

Further....your example of Titus 1.4 grammatically proves that The Son is our Savior....making Him Theos.

Titus 1:4

To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.

Being a savior does not make anyone a theos

Evidently, you are ignorant of Nehemiah 9:27 where God's word declares that He has given saviours, note saviours


Therefore thou deliveredst them into the hand of their enemies, who vexed them: and in the time of their trouble, when they cried unto thee, thou heardest them from heaven; and according to thy manifold mercies thou gavest them saviours, who saved them out of the hand of their enemies.

Should you ever choose to believe scripture, this one would be good one for you to start with

 

[oatmeal]

Agreed...

We have to remember that Trinity-denier-tards like Oatmeal, Pops, etc, etc, don't care about the original languages at all...zero....they are not critical thinkers...and they become offended when someone is...

What would you know about believing scripture?

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.

The trinity by proclaiming "co-equality" clearly rejects Jesus' own words!!!!

 

[RevTestament]

Scripture supports Trinitarian doctrine.

1 John 5:7 Modern English Version (MEV)

7 There are three who testify in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit, and the three are one.

First off I know you have been shown that is the dubious Johannine Comma. Nevertheless, scripture supports that there are 3 in the Godhead, but not all the additional "doctrine."

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

In agreement with some of the earliest expressions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before Tertullian utilized personae in Latin; they were referred to as forms, modes, or aspects of God.

Modes was decreasingly used because of Sabellians and what we moderns would refer to as Modalism. Forms has much the same connotation as modes, indicating sequentiality and non-simultaneity.

Aspects is more comparable to facets. And with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit having often been referred to as God, His Word, and His Wisdom by the earliest apologists from the second century; I'd contend this is the initial minimum salvific threshold.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the three eternal uncreated simultaneous ontologically divine aspects as God, His Word, and His Wisdom.

Any detraction from the eternal, uncreated, ontological deity of the Son and Holy Spirit is cause for scrutiny and questioning one's salvific faith.

This needs to be repeated.

A specific formulation and complete understanding is not the initial threshold for salvific faith, so the Trinity doctrine (which few can broach in any significant manner beyond conceptual summary anyway) is not the vital belief for salvation.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other, and are the three eternal uncreated aspects of God in some manner as a singular divine being. Attributing createdness and non-eternality for the Son or Holy Spirit, or otherwise denying the divinity of either or both, would be beyond the outer perimeter of salvific faith.

 

[Apple7]

All I read is GOD raised Him, so if we are to go on the Triune nature of God, the Father raised the Son.

The Triune nature inherently means that each Person is involved.

 

[Apple7]

So then a three part god raised a one part god from the dead?

So that makes four gods

Interesting

The Trinity is not the result of counted things.

Again, you display your Unitarian ignorance...

 

[Apple7]

Actually the Greek means awakened when referring to Jesus, and there is a different word for the father actually fixing up Jesus out of the dead.

Show us when your ban expires...

The holy spirit is the father. Thus, the holy spirit=a father= the God.

Nope.

 

[Apple7]

What would you know about believing scripture?

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.

The trinity by proclaiming "co-equality" clearly rejects Jesus' own words!!!!

As the God-man, there should be numerous verses regarding His humanity.

 

[Cruciform]

So then a three part god raised a one part god from the dead?

Rather, all three Divine Persons who are the one Being of God raised one of those three Divine Persons---the Incarnate Son---from the dead. Your fundamental error is in failing to distinguish between the concepts of "Being" and Person." God is THREE Persons in ONE Being.

So that makes four gods.

Wrong, for the reasons outlined above.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Apple7]

This needs to be repeated.

A specific formulation and complete understanding is not the initial threshold for salvific faith, so the Trinity doctrine (which few can broach in any significant manner beyond conceptual summary anyway) is not the vital belief for salvation.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other, and are the three eternal uncreated aspects of God in some manner as a singular divine being. Attributing createdness and non-eternality for the Son or Holy Spirit, or otherwise denying the divinity of either or both, would be beyond the outer perimeter of salvific faith.

One must worship the Creator as He has revealed Himself, Triune, in order to be saved.

True Christians are Trinitarian.

 

[StanJ]

One must worship the Creator as He has revealed Himself, Triune, in order to be saved.
True Christians are Trinitarian.

Agreed! You can't accept the real savior if you don't agree with God as to WHO He actually is. Confess means to agree, not claim.

 

[genuineoriginal]

One must worship the Creator as He has revealed Himself, Triune, in order to be saved.

True Christians are Trinitarian.

Agreed! You can't accept the real savior if you don't agree with God as to WHO He actually is. Confess means to agree, not claim.

If your opinions are truth, then surely you would be able to come up with some scriptures that show that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved.

All I can find in the Bible are verses that show you must believe that God sent His Son in order to be saved.

Now, if you want to throw out Sola Scriptura as a doctrine, then go ahead and accept the teachings of the Magisterium as the sole authority about God's nature.

 

[Apple7]

If your opinions are truth, then surely you would be able to come up with some scriptures that show that you must believe in the Trinity to be saved.

All I can find in the Bible are verses that show you must believe that God sent His Son in order to be saved.

Now, if you want to throw out Sola Scriptura as a doctrine, then go ahead and accept the teachings of the Magisterium as the sole authority about God's nature.

Example #2:

And it shall be that everyone who shall worship the name Lord will be saved." (Acts 2.21)

For everyone, "whoever may worship the name Lord will be saved." (Romans 10:13)



And we are told that the ‘name’ is one and the same for Father, Son & Spirit.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

One must worship the Creator as He has revealed Himself, Triune, in order to be saved.

True Christians are Trinitarian.

A specific formulation and complete understanding is not the initial threshold for salvific faith, so the Trinity doctrine (which few can broach in any significant manner beyond conceptual summary anyway) is not the vital belief for salvation.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other, and are the three eternal uncreated aspects of God in some manner as a singular divine being. Attributing createdness and non-eternality for the Son or Holy Spirit, or otherwise denying the divinity of either or both, would be beyond the outer perimeter of salvific faith.


For some of the earliest expressions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before Tertullian utilized personae in Latin; they were referred to as forms, modes, or aspects of God.

Modes was decreasingly used because of Sabellians and what we moderns would refer to as Modalism. Forms has much the same connotation as modes, indicating sequentiality and non-simultaneity.

Aspects is more comparable to facets. And with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit having often been referred to as God, His Word, and His Wisdom by the earliest apologists from the second century; I'd contend this is the initial minimum salvific threshold.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the three eternal uncreated simultaneous ontologically divine aspects as God, His Word, and His Wisdom.

Any detraction from the eternal, uncreated, ontological deity of the Son and Holy Spirit is cause for scrutiny and questioning one's salvific faith.

 

[Apple7]

A specific formulation and complete understanding is not the initial threshold for salvific faith, so the Trinity doctrine (which few can broach in any significant manner beyond conceptual summary anyway) is not the vital belief for salvation.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other, and are the three eternal uncreated aspects of God in some manner as a singular divine being. Attributing createdness and non-eternality for the Son or Holy Spirit, or otherwise denying the divinity of either or both, would be beyond the outer perimeter of salvific faith.


For some of the earliest expressions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before Tertullian utilized personae in Latin; they were referred to as forms, modes, or aspects of God.

Modes was decreasingly used because of Sabellians and what we moderns would refer to as Modalism. Forms has much the same connotation as modes, indicating sequentiality and non-simultaneity.

Aspects is more comparable to facets. And with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit having often been referred to as God, His Word, and His Wisdom by the earliest apologists from the second century; I'd contend this is the initial minimum salvific threshold.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the three eternal uncreated simultaneous ontologically divine aspects as God, His Word, and His Wisdom.

Any detraction from the eternal, uncreated, ontological deity of the Son and Holy Spirit is cause for scrutiny and questioning one's salvific faith.

3 Persons; 1 Being.

Simple.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

A specific formulation and complete understanding is not the initial threshold for salvific faith, so the Trinity doctrine (which few can broach in any significant manner beyond conceptual summary anyway) is not the vital belief for salvation.

Truth.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not each other, and are the three eternal uncreated aspects of God in some manner as a singular divine being. Attributing createdness and non-eternality for the Son or Holy Spirit, or otherwise denying the divinity of either or both, would be beyond the outer perimeter of salvific faith.


For some of the earliest expressions of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit before Tertullian utilized personae in Latin; they were referred to as forms, modes, or aspects of God.

Modes was decreasingly used because of Sabellians and what we moderns would refer to as Modalism. Forms has much the same connotation as modes, indicating sequentiality and non-simultaneity.

Aspects is more comparable to facets. And with Father, Son, and Holy Spirit having often been referred to as God, His Word, and His Wisdom by the earliest apologists from the second century; I'd contend this is the initial minimum salvific threshold.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are the three eternal uncreated simultaneous ontologically divine aspects as God, His Word, and His Wisdom.

Any detraction from the eternal, uncreated, ontological deity of the Son and Holy Spirit is cause for scrutiny and questioning one's salvific faith.

Who cares?


I'm truly sorry to see you unfriended me as we still at least agree on Geocentrism.

When you decide to leave Theology Proper in the dust and cease trying to pin some theological label on me, maybe we can find some common ground in Christ.

 

[PneumaPsucheSoma]

3 Persons; 1 Being.

Simple.

Too simple, and erroneous; especially in English, for in English all persons are beings (though not all beings are persons).

No need for false conceptual dilution as nominal dogma for salvific faith. The Trinity doctrine is not the threshold for salvific faith. Minutiae of theology is not the arbitrage point for salvation.

Denying the eternal uncreated deity of the Son and/or Holy Spirit would be the salvific concern. NOT the specific "how" of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit all being God in whatever manner.

Whether it's the alleged "simplicity" of "one being; three persons" or the exhaustive minutiae of fontal plenitude/innascibility, paternity/filiation, and spiration/procession along with all other theological points, specific doctrinal belief is not the threshold of salvation.