apothanein kerdos Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.21 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 Men, having never seen God, arguing over the nature of His existance, unable to explain the "mystery of Godliness", nevertheless coin a meaningless and unexplainable term to summerize a meaningless and unexplainable doctrine, and then to compound the error, demand that all Christains believe and acknowledge this new "revelation" (325 AD), and that they are not saved if they don't! What arrogance. Salvation is so sweet, simple, and free for the whosoever will, and lawyers and scholars are still doing their work, as they did in Jesus day, blocking the way of salvation for the simple and weak. If the bible does not CLEARLY state that you must believe TRINITY and all related doctrines and subdoctrines, you might be well advised to NOT come up with a damnation conclusion on your own, for with the same measure that you measure others, you will be measured. The only arrogance (born of ignorance) here is your own. The "new doctrine" was coined long before 325. I can point you to the term trinity being used in 150AD and the concept being taught well before that. I can point to 1st century church fathers, as well as the Bible, that affirm the deity of Jesus. A person cannot be saved without acknowleding that Jesus IS God, this is both scriptural and traditional. Salvation is not something that is "willy nilly." If we deny the death, ressurection, His deity, His place above creation, His perfection, His virgin birth, etc...we cannot be saved. It is as simple as that. You cannot accept what you ultimately deny. Any effort to disavow this is to admit to believing in the Satanic influence of post-modernism on Christianity. The Bible also doesn't CLEARY say that we HAVE to rely on it for sole revelation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherTraveler Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 Jesus is God, I believe that. So point, don't say you could, DO SO. Otherwise, your saying, not doing. Where in the scriptures does it say you have to believe in the TRINITY or you are not saved? It says in Revelation not to add to nor take away from this word, and there are warnings of serious results for doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherTraveler Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 For thousands of years, and throughout the entire Old Testament, God is one, God is saviour, provider, on and on. If Jesus, when He physically walked and ministered, wanted to introduce the term and doctrinal explainations of the TRINITY, He would have done so, but neither He, nor His apostles, nor any writer of scripture, ever coined such a term, nor set the doctrine of TRINITY in any conclusive form, and certainly none ever REQUIRED acceptance of such for salvation. Virgin birth? Most learn later, but the scriptures are clear. Jesus is God, and He wears "King of Kings, Lord of Lords", but there is never anywhere a mention of this word TRINITY. This error is conclusive teaching. Conclusive teaching is what Darwin did in his error to take many facts and misassemble them into a silly but dangerous error. I do not dispute the scriptural facts, I dispute the silly assembly, and certainly the damnation of anyone that does not agree with your conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherTraveler Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 [The Bible also doesn't CLEARY say that we HAVE to rely on it for sole revelation. ------------------- "He who saves a single life, saves the world entire" Talmud] Opps, I missed this earlier. If you are serious that the scriptures are not the basis for revelation, there goes the boundries that divide the straight and narrow from the wide paths. However, if you are serious in finding revelation outside the scriptures, such as that foolish quote from the Talmud, how can you in any reasonable way demand people to believe anything and sentence them to damnation for not agreeing with you? When it comes to believing, I prefer to believe as the scripture has said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.21 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 Jesus is God, I believe that. So point, don't say you could, DO SO. Otherwise, your saying, not doing. Where in the scriptures does it say you have to believe in the TRINITY or you are not saved? It says in Revelation not to add to nor take away from this word, and there are warnings of serious results for doing so. Where in the scriptures does it say you have to always rely on the scriptures? Anyway, I believe I've proven my point in previous posts. To deny the deity of Christ is to deny who He is. In John 1:1 we are told that Jesus IS God...denying this is like denying the ressurection. I am not saying one has to believe in the Trinity to be saved. I am saying one has to believe that Jesus IS God in order to be saved. If we cannot believe this very basic premise then we are beliving in a false god. If Jesus, when He physically walked and ministered, wanted to introduce the term and doctrinal explainations of the TRINITY, He would have done so, but neither He, nor His apostles, nor any writer of scripture, ever coined such a term, nor set the doctrine of TRINITY in any conclusive form, and certainly none ever REQUIRED acceptance of such for salvation. How absurd someone would demand I point to scripture when it's quite obvious they haven't done a serious study of it. Jesus and the writers were very adament in the trinity doctrine. The reason we don't see "trinity" used in the Bible is that "Triniy" is a Latin term, the new testament was composed in Greek (this is the "no duh" concept of the day). THe concept of the Trinity, however, is found, ESPECIALLY in the writings of John who was writing to confirm the deity of Jesus. The idea that it's not taught in the Bible is so absurd that it's almost funny. If you are serious that the scriptures are not the basis for revelation, there goes the boundries that divide the straight and narrow from the wide paths. However, if you are serious in finding revelation outside the scriptures, such as that foolish quote from the Talmud, how can you in any reasonable way demand people to believe anything and sentence them to damnation for not agreeing with you? When it comes to believing, I prefer to believe as the scripture has said. I asked why we must based absolutely everything on the Bible. "I ordered from Pizza Hut today." "Oh really? Where in the Bible does it say you can do that?!?!?!" The deity of Christ being essential is simply a logical conclusion after we have read scripture. If we deny the deity of Christ, we deny who Christ is, which means we deny Him entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherTraveler Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 "when it's quite obvious they haven't done a serious study of it." I suppose my eye color is also quite obvious. It is a destraction from the discussion to shoot from the hip at another person as though you know them and can therefore issue lying statements about them. When you have run out of facts, you make excuse, when you have run out of excuse, you change your story (now it is not essential to believe in the trinity to be saved, you say), and after you change you story, you insult and lie in an effort to devalue another person so that your shifting position might not be detected. I don't take away your salvation although I think it is dangerous to base your revelations on other than the scriptures. My arguement is that the scriptures are given that the man of God may be equiped, furnished for every good work, and that trusting in the scriptures is how people come to salvation, and the scriptures reveal many wonderful truths, but there are no references to many things that people REQUIRE of others, and among the list is TRINITY, but not exclusively. Many require certain styles of dress, music, even specific versions of the scriptures, but the danger is the adding of unnecessary burdens, which the apostles took up this very question in the book of ACTS reguarding circumcision. Don't add or remove from the scriptures and then require others to trust such an uncertain path, it is just wrong to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apothanein kerdos Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 331 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 8,713 Content Per Day: 1.21 Reputation: 21 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 I post an entire response and all you can come back with is a response to one thing I said? I think that proves my point It is a destraction from the discussion to shoot from the hip at another person as though you know them and can therefore issue lying statements about them. It's a simple fact, you've shown that you haven't studied scripture at the point you say Jesus and none of the books dealt with the Trinity or Jesus' deity. The entire purpose of John is to show that Jesus is God. Thus, to make the claim that none of the NT books deal with this issue, is to show you haven't studied the issue. It would be like someone saying they know everything about NASCAR, but when you mention Jeff Gordon they just give you a blank look. It would be justifiable to say they have not studied NASCAR all that well and their supposed knowledge isn't knowledge at all. This is the same thing. If a person says the Bible doesn't adress the diety of Jesus or the Trinity then they have not done a serious study of scripture. When you have run out of facts, you make excuse, when you have run out of excuse, you change your story (now it is not essential to believe in the trinity to be saved, you say), and after you change you story, you insult and lie in an effort to devalue another person so that your shifting position might not be detected. Where in the world did I change my story? I dare you to quote me where I said belief in the Trinity is essential (though to be a growing Christian I do believe one has to believe in the trinity). What I said was belief in the [i[deity of Christ. You hold a mute point until you can adequately address this. As it is, I've used Greek, looked at the issue in context, brought forth the context of scripture, etc. You have not. Yeah...I'm really running out of facts here I don't take away your salvation although I think it is dangerous to base your revelations on other than the scriptures. Where in scripture does it say that? My arguement is that the scriptures are given that the man of God may be equiped, furnished for every good work, and that trusting in the scriptures is how people come to salvation, and the scriptures reveal many wonderful truths, but there are no references to many things that people REQUIRE of others, and among the list is TRINITY, but not exclusively. Many require certain styles of dress, music, even specific versions of the scriptures, but the danger is the adding of unnecessary burdens, which the apostles took up this very question in the book of ACTS reguarding circumcision. There's a difference in requirement of dress and requirement of doctrine. Under your belief I could deny the death of Christ and still be a "Christian." Your belief is absurd and baseless. I have shown from scripture that to deny the deity of Christ is to deny who He is. The Trinity is not just "some doctrine." It is the core doctrine of God. IF we remove the Trinity we remove 80% of Christian doctrine including the death and ressurection. It is that vital. Don't add or remove from the scriptures and then require others to trust such an uncertain path, it is just wrong to do so. That passage was speaking specifically of Revelation (this book). The Bible is a compliation of books AND wasn't compiled until after Revelation was written. How, pray tell, could the author tell us not to add to something that didn't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Openly Curious Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 55 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,568 Content Per Day: 0.68 Reputation: 770 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/18/2006 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 re: Is belief in the Trinity essential to one's Salvation? Snow A belief in the Trinity is not essential to one's Salvation the Trinity and Salvation are two different things. For one to be saved one must confess his sins and believe in their hearts that Jesus died and arose again Romans 10:9 For this act is only the beginning of one's salvation simply believing and then confessing that belief starts the relationship with God the Father. As you progress in this newfound relationship with Christ you will discover the trinity as you will then have access to the Heavenly Father Romans 5:2 & Ephesians 2:18 As a child of God being adopted into the family of God through His Son (who is also our elder brother in the family of God) you no longer are estranged (a bastard child spiritually speaking) you now have access to your heavenly father and can approach Him in the relationship and ask what you will according to His will. The forgiveness of sins gives you this assurance 1 John 1:5-10 to approach God the Father and He will hear you personally 1 John 5:13-15 also John 14:13-14 as you learn to confide in and trust God with your life. As a newborn babe in Christ you will need to grow and mature in your faith and knowledge of Him and you will need the Holy Spirit to lead and guide you into all truth as the Spirit of God will bring comfort and teach you the truth if you become a student of His Word as throughout one's Christians life and walk with the Lord the Holy Spirit should be the most earnest of our inheritance Ephesians 1:11-14 & 2:13-22 it certainly is mine because the Spirit of God will bring to your rememberance time and time again His words to comfort you in all of your trials in life no matter what they are you will never be alone again. So the trinity in not at all essential to one's Salvation. Salvation is the door to the Trinity God Richly Bless you in your Studies Openly Curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kabowd Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 112 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 3,489 Content Per Day: 0.48 Reputation: 13 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/28/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 If Jesus wasn't God, He wasn't spotless. If He wasn't spotless, His death meant nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnotherTraveler Posted January 20, 2006 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 80 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 1,595 Content Per Day: 0.22 Reputation: 10 Days Won: 0 Joined: 09/12/2004 Status: Offline Share Posted January 20, 2006 "Under your belief I could deny the death of Christ and still be a "Christian." Your belief is absurd and baseless." You can deny anything you want to deny. I use the scriptures to find salvation, and I use the scriptures to establish doctrine, and I use the scriptures for correction and instruction in righteousness, and if that is baseless to you, fine, but to me, using the scriptures is the only real way to find salvation and to validate revelation. I also could put forth Latin, Greek, or other languages, but truth is true in every language, and in NO language, that is NONE, is there found writings to establish truth or error outside of scriptures regarding salvation. You posture for the scriptures and against them, which is it? I will base my believing and teach others to base their's on the scriptures, as I have done for 30 years now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts