Is a belief in the Trinity Doctrine neccessary for salvation?

[Guest shiloh357]

This is an excerp from a pro trinity sight called defending the Trinity where they themselves seem to admit that the trinity was not formulated as a doctrine until the 4th century and did not date back to the Apostles.

''Although it is true that the doctrine of the Trinity was not officially formulated as a doctrine until the fourth century, this in no way detracts from the fact that the Doctrine of the Trinity is a biblical doctrine. For example, there is certainly a clear threefold pattern of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the New Testament record (for example, to name just a few of the more well known: Matt. 28:19; 2 Cor. 13:14; 1 Cor. 12:4-6).''

When it was formalized as a doctrine is not as relevant as whether or not the Trinity can be demonstrated from the Scripture. There is no "teaching" on anything called a "trinity" in the Bible.

That does not mean the concept did not already exist and that it was not already in motion. The Egyptians were using the mathematical concept of "pi" to build pyramids centures before the Greeks invented and codified "pi" as a mathematical principle. Just because no one talked about "pi" or called it "pi" does not mean it did not already exist.

So, to discredit the Trinity on when it was formulated as an official doctrine is pretty useless.

I was not trying to support or discredit the trinity by my post i was responding to some one who said it was a historical fact that the teaching of the trinity went back to the Apostles. The historical fact is that it was formulated in the 4th century not by the apostles. I discredit the teaching of the t5rinity because it is not taught in scripture

No, it isnt "taught" in scripture, but it is there in operation nonetheless. It goes back to the apostles even if they did they did not formulate it into an official doctrine. The Trinity is worked out in the Scripture and this far more important than any doctrinal formulation.

[OneLight]

Hmmm ... seems this thread is now degrading into questioning the authenticity of scripture. Sad ...

[Mudcat]

I never voted, actually.

You such a holdout shiloh357.

I'll have to make a note never to play poker with you.

[Botz]

Mudcat...This poll has been open for 6 days

with 3,200 + views and 468 responses

The vote so far is... 13 say you have to believe in the Trinity to be saved and 21 say you don't have to believe in the Trinity to be saved.

Would anyone object to me claiming the victory of majority for the side of those that say you don't have to believe the Trinity to be saved.

I would ask, in this thread, I have seen one brave person step out on a limb and say they changed their mind.

Has anyone else had a similar inclination to shift position, or perhaps at least look at things a little differently, one way or the other?

Either concept have always been anathema to me, not because I necessarily agree or disagree with them, but because ever since G-d by His grace struck up a relationship with me, I have at times wondered about His Essence, and the very nature of His Being, and my finite mind has soared to dizzy heights in my spirit as I have tired to touch and experience something of the unfathomable nature of His Presence. At times my soul has been flooded with aspects of His Mercy, or His Patience, or His Understanding or the depths of His Plan to unite the Human Race through the blood of His dear Son.... but the vastness and the enormity of it all are beyond my concept, and when it comes to defining the L-rd, I am content to say 'I know whom I have believed....'

Some Believers like me are reluctant to totally endorse the limits of learned mens discourses and subsequent teachings on the nature of G-d, or to champion either or any camp....prefering to subscribe to what has been revealed to them about G-d in the Scriptures... and what continues to be an ongoing personal revelation. The dogmas and doctrinal teachings should be seen as an aid, but if their explanations contravene what the Scriptures say, or fudge the issues in any way, they can be less than helpful. It is also true, that certain types of people, by their very nature, will benefit from their guidence more than others... but ultimately to my mind they should be used as 'helps', and not regarded as 'gospel', no matter how many Scriptures are quoted, or learned scholarly men honoured.

[OneLight]

Hmmm ... seems this thread is now degrading into questioning the authenticity of scripture. Sad ...

I have not seen anyone do that OneLight

1st of all many people believe that 1st John 5:7 was added to scripture well after the Bible was finished to manipulate the teaching of the trinity into scripture

[Grace1479]

Once again Grace, these scripture support Oneness not the Trinity.

OK, so maybe I'm a little dumb, but oneness and the Trinity is exactly the same. Three Persons in One...Oneness...three Persons - Trinity??????

[Guest shiloh357]

I never voted, actually.

You such a holdout shiloh357.

I'll have to make a note never to play poker with you.

Well the reason I didn't vote is because I don't think that it was the right question (no offense to the OP).

We are of course, limited in what we can understand about God even in what He has revealed. I don't believe a person has to believe or understand much of anything to get saved beyond simply recognizing that that God loves them but that their sin has separated them from God and that Jesus came to bridge the gulf that sin created between God and man, and that by repenting of their sin and turning to Christ that He will save them out of sin and into eternal life. God loves, Jesus died for you and if you will trust Him, He will save you and keep you saved. That is what people need to know and understand in order to GET saved.

Becoming a Christian and growing in Christ are two completely different things. What people fail to realize is that there is a limit to what we can sacrifice and still call ourselves Christians. I have to wonder, what is next? What is the next major doctrine that we place on the chopping block?

While there is much in the Christian faith that reasonable people can differ about, there are some things that are simply not up for debate.

Many of the things smiles listed before, like the bodily resurrection of Jesus, His deity, the virgin birth, these things are the basic, defining elements of the Christian faith. If you take away only one of those things, if suddenly, the virgin birth is no longer necessary, it unravels the plan of salvation itself. If Jesus was not virgin born, then His deity comes into question, and it just continues to snow ball from there.

As for the trinity, smiles raised an interesting point, and that is that know God we have to accept Him as He presents Himself and not as we choose to accept Him. We do not come to God on our own terms, and the Bible is not a smorgasbaord where each get to pick and choose according to our own tastes.

I reject any teaching that God is unknownable. He is knowable. We may not be able to know everything about Him in the absolute fulness of his person and essence, but He has revealed everything to us that is within the bounds of our capacity to know Him as He wants to be known. Rejecting the Trinity amounts to rejecting a vital part of how God has revealed Himself to us.

1. There is one true God and He is eternal and immutable.

2. There are three eternal persons namely The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Bible is very careful to keep each of them distinct. They are never identified with each other. Jesus is never called "The Father" The Spirit is never called "The Son" and so forth. There is never any kind of interchangableness in how they are represented in Scripture. Jesus prays to the Father and claims that He was sent by the Father and that He only did what the Father told Him to do.

Jesus, in the Garden of Gethsemene also demonstrated that He and the Father had separate wills. He prayed, "not my will, but thine be done." Jesus submitted His will to the will of His Father, which makes no sense if Jesus is the Father.

3. All three persons, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are represented as fully God.

[AnotherTraveler]

Mudcat...This poll has been open for 6 days

with 3,200 + views and 468 responses

The vote so far is... 13 say you have to believe in the Trinity to be saved and 21 say you don't have to believe in the Trinity to be saved.

Would anyone object to me claiming the victory of majority for the side of those that say you don't have to believe the Trinity to be saved.

I would ask, in this thread, I have seen one brave person step out on a limb and say they changed their mind.

Has anyone else had a similar inclination to shift position, or perhaps at least look at things a little differently, one way or the other?

Either concept have always been anathema to me, not because I necessarily agree or disagree with them, but because ever since G-d by His grace struck up a relationship with me, I have at times wondered about His Essence, and the very nature of His Being, and my finite mind has soared to dizzy heights in my spirit as I have tired to touch and experience something of the unfathomable nature of His Presence. At times my soul has been flooded with aspects of His Mercy, or His Patience, or His Understanding or the depths of His Plan to unite the Human Race through the blood of His dear Son.... but the vastness and the enormity of it all are beyond my concept, and when it comes to defining the L-rd, I am content to say 'I know whom I have believed....'

Some Believers like me are reluctant to totally endorse the limits of learned mens discourses and subsequent teachings on the nature of G-d, or to champion either or any camp....prefering to subscribe to what has been revealed to them about G-d in the Scriptures... and what continues to be an ongoing personal revelation. The dogmas and doctrinal teachings should be seen as an aid, but if their explanations contravene what the Scriptures say, or fudge the issues in any way, they can be less than helpful. It is also true, that certain types of people, by their very nature, will benefit from their guidence more than others... but ultimately to my mind they should be used as 'helps', and not regarded as 'gospel', no matter how many Scriptures are quoted, or learned scholarly men honoured.

What an excellent post! I also am not a card carrying member of either camp, and find benefit listening to both sides when they are not condemning one another for disagreeing.

[OneLight]

Hmmm ... seems this thread is now degrading into questioning the authenticity of scripture. Sad ...

I have not seen anyone do that OneLight

1st of all many people believe that 1st John 5:7 was added to scripture well after the Bible was finished to manipulate the teaching of the trinity into scripture

Did you not read the rest of the post.....but I for one think that if that is so, God Kept the integrity of scripture because I believe that 1st John 5;7 actually support oneness not the trinity.

I do not know if it was added, however many people do believe it was. What i was saying that IF it was added God kept the integrity of His word because that verse does not teach the Trinity but Oneness. So IF it was added to add the trinity into the scriptures it failed and IF it was not added it still teaches Oneness as the rest of scripture does as well.

I never said I believe it was added I truly do not know nor care, God has kept His word true regardless of the efforts of man to distort it.

Yes, I read the rest of the post and I never said anything about your beliefs. The fact that it was even said is what I was talking about. I am puzzled as to why you would even mention it if you do not believe it?

[Grace1479]

Once again Grace, these scripture support Oneness not the Trinity.

OK, so maybe I'm a little dumb, but oneness and the Trinity is exactly the same. Three Persons in One...Oneness...three Persons - Trinity??????

No they are not the same Oneness believers belief God is One period. The trinity believers think that God is three separate beings.

I understand what you say to me, but in my heart the oneness and the trinity is more or less the same. I don't really know how to explain how I understand it. But for me they are one (where I see the oneness) but Three persons (the trinity), If you can try to understand what I mean. Furthermore this is my believe:

By Trinity we mean that there is only one God (Deuteronomy 6:4) consisting of one essence-substance, who is a Trinity of three individual Persons with independent intellect, emotions and will: the Father & the Son & the Holy Spirit. It does not mean that there are three individual god's who make up one Godhead. There is only one God who is made up of three persons. Take any one of these persons away and you no longer have the one and only True God.

See this is where my understanding of oneness also comes in, They are three Persons, but One God.