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

[Apple7]

That demon (YOU, Apple7BS) is treating me as arrogantly and pejoratively as always... Mr. Pseudo-Wannabe-Christian.

Keep those words of love flowing..........PPSBS...

 

[Bright Raven]

All and all in the end; Yes

https://carm.org/do-you-have-to-believe-the-trinity-to-be-christian

 

[genuineoriginal]

and here, we have;

Denial

Denial

Denial

You do know what denial is as you do it ALL the time, but NEVER directly answer posts that refute your POV. No use wasting anymore time on you.
Ignored!

Once again, you have been unable to show that the scriptures teach the Trinity, much less that the scriptures demand a person must believe in the Trinity to be a Christian.

Your denial of the plain words of scripture is noted.

 

[IMJerusha]

and all through this thread you have been wrong and refuse to admit it. So be it...you will have NO excuse when the time comes, but you WILL bow you knee and confess exactly who Jesus really is.

As will we all.

Only people like you, who constantly say to learn what the Bible says, practise the contrary. You're like a broken record, incapable of moving on from your inculcated views.

The BIBLE says Jesus is our savior. The Bible says that God is our savior,...

And that does not automatically lead everyone to " thus Jesus is our God and Savior." To Whom do we pray....to Yeshua?...No, we pray to the Father in Yeshua's Name. Who has all knowledge...Yeshua?...No, only the Father has all knowledge. We need to be careful how we use the word "God."

... and ONE with His father and the Holy Spirit, our Triune God.

Yeshua plainly stated that there is only One that is good; that all of His authority comes from the Father; that by obeying the commands of His Father He remains in His Father's Love. He takes, even now, a position of submission and obedience to the Father and the Ruach. Oftentimes, people declaring the Trinity tend to dismiss the distinction between the Three and there is a distinction.

 

[StanJ]

As will we all.

And that does not automatically lead everyone to " thus Jesus is our God and Savior,"

Yeshua plainly stated that there is only One that is good; that all of His authority comes from the Father; that by obeying the commands of His Father He remains in His Father's Love. He takes, even now, a position of submission and obedience to the Father and the Ruach. Oftentimes, people declaring the Trinity tend to dismiss the distinction between the Three and there is a distinction.

Indeed.

I agree, sadly not everyone can follow the "logic" if you will, in scripture, even when they read the words Peter wrote in 2 Peter 1:1;
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

Of course their is a distinction, shown by the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
They are different and yet ONE as the Shema shows. They are one in purpose and being, just as Jesus said.

Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.
Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

 

[IMJerusha]

Indeed.

I agree, sadly not everyone can follow the "logic" if you will, in scripture, even when they read the words Peter wrote in 2 Peter 1:1;
Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

Of course their is a distinction, shown by the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
They are different and yet ONE as the Shema shows. They are one in purpose and being, just as Jesus said.

Jesus said: I and the Father are one.
Jesus said: If you've seen me you've seen the Father.
Jesus said: If you knew me, you would know my Father also.
Jesus said: You shall worship the Lord your God, and serve Him only.
Jesus said: If you do not believe that I am He, you will indeed die in your sins.
Jesus said: You call me ‘Teacher’ and ‘Lord,’ and rightly so, for that is what I am.
Jesus said: Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.

I see Peter's words as "Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Yeshua HaMashiach, To those who through the righteousness of our God (HaShem) and Savior Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMashiach) have received a faith as precious as ours:"

I see Yeshua as being one in purpose with HaShem but not "being," as in the same skin so to speak, and the reason is simple, His Words as found in John 15, and other places in Scripture where it's stated that Yeshua is seated at the right hand of God. Those who consider Yeshua God do not consider His divinity was given to Him along with His authority. In other words, only God the Father (HaShem) has divinity in and of Himself. By Yeshua's own Words, EVERYTHING Yeshua has comes from God the Father so when we talk about the Trinity we are not talking about three Gods but only One God with His Son and His Ruach.

 

[genuineoriginal]

All and all in the end; Yes

https://carm.org/do-you-have-to-believe-the-trinity-to-be-christian

From your link:

_____
. . .
you do not have to believe in the Trinity to be a Christian
. . .
The Bible does not tell us that we must believe in the Trinity in order to become saved, that is, to become a Christian
. . .
It is not believing in the Trinity that makes us Christian
. . .
it's not a requirement to affirm the doctrines the Trinity in order to become saved
. . .
_____​

That is what I have been saying all along in this thread.

The rest of the things said in the link about the Trinity are debatable, since none of them are actually taught in the scriptures.

 

[StanJ]

I see Peter's words as "]Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Yeshua HaMashiach, To those who through the righteousness of our God (HaShem) and Savior Jesus Christ (Yeshua HaMashiach) have received a faith as precious as ours:"

I see Yeshua as being one in purpose with HaShem but not "being," as in the same skin so to speak, and the reason is simple, His Words as found in John 15, and other places in Scripture where it's stated that Yeshua is seated at the right hand of God. Those who consider Yeshua God do not consider His divinity was given to Him along with His authority. In other words, only God the Father (HaShem) has divinity in and of Himself. By Yeshua's own Words, EVERYTHING Yeshua has comes from God the Father so when we talk about the Trinity we are not talking about three Gods but only One God with His Son and His Ruach.

So you CAN'T answer my last post?

Do you deny what John 1:18 also states?
Do you know of the Granville Sharp rules in Greek?

 

[IMJerusha]

So you CAN'T answer my last post?

What is there to answer? You agreed with me.

Do you deny what John 1:18 also states?

Absolutely not. I deny it states what some wish it to, that Yeshua is also the Father. And since you mention John 1:18, the Greek of that verse declares Yeshua as "being in the bosom of the Father." This does not mean that Yeshua has divinity in and of Himself but rather that which was imparted to Him by the Father.

Do you know of the Granville Sharp rules in Greek?

Yes. Are you aware of Daniel Wallace's Sharp Redivivus? A Reexamination of the Granville Sharp Rule?

 

[StanJ]

What is there to answer?
You agreed with me.

Plenty, but you avoid or deflect as most can clearly see.
Not at all, but as your ilk tends to do, you equivocate by using Hebrew words NOT found in the NT, and the Granville Sharp rule of Greek states that AND between two nouns indicates they are the same person. Doesn't really matter what you SEE or think, it is was the TRUTH is.

Absolutely not. I deny it states what some wish it to, that Yeshua is also the Father. And since you mention John 1:18, the Greek of that verse declares Yeshua as "being in the bosom of the Father." This does not mean that Yeshua has divinity in and of Himself but rather that which was imparted to Him by the Father.

It says what it says, and quoting a bad English translation doesn't help your POV, but only confirms your dogmatic stance. The following shows 5 of the most accurate English translations that confirm Jesus HIMSELF is God.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 1:18&version=NIV;NLT;ESV;NET;MOUNCE
In any event IF you understood the English used in the KJV in the context of its day, you would know it meant exactly what the modern versions state.

Yes. Are you aware of Daniel Wallace's Sharp Redivivus? A Reexamination of the Granville Sharp Rule?

Indeed, and apparently you are as well, but you have not actually read it.
Let me succinctly summarize for you. Wallace concludes by saying;
Winer’s opinion notwithstanding, solid linguistic reasons and plenty of phenomenological data were found to support the requirements that Sharp laid down. When substantives meet the requirements of Sharp’s canon, apposition is the result, and inviolably so in the NT. The canon even works outside the twenty-seven books and, hence, ought to be resurrected as a sound principle which has overwhelming validity in all of Greek literature. Consequently, in Titus 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1 we are compelled to recognize that, on a grammatical level, a heavy burden of proof rests with the one who wishes to deny that “God and Savior” refers to one person, Jesus Christ.

I suggest you read it again;
https://bible.org/article/sharp-redivivus-reexamination-granville-sharp-rule
and this time pay attention to what he is conveying.

 

[IMJerusha]

Plenty, but you avoid or deflect as most can clearly see.

I don't think so. What exactly do you want me to address head on that you don't think I have?

Not at all, but as your ilk tends to do, you equivocate by using Hebrew words NOT found in the NT,

I'm unaware of any Hebrew word I've used to sidestep any Truth of Scripture. Enlighten me, please.

and the Granville Sharp rule of Greek states that AND between two nouns indicates they are the same person. Doesn't really matter what you SEE or think, it is was the TRUTH is.

This is a "truth" that seems to be argued by varying Greek language scholars and complicated by punctuation used in the Koine.

It says what it says, and quoting a bad English translation doesn't help your POV, but only confirms your dogmatic stance.

I wasn't aware that J.P. Green or the United Bible Society were poor translators.

The following shows 5 of the most accurate English translations that confirm Jesus HIMSELF is God.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 1:18&version=NIV;NLT;ESV;NET;MOUNCE

Always read the footnotes Stan. Check out footnote b under the ESV.

In any event IF you understood the English used in the KJV in the context of its day, you would know it meant exactly what the modern versions state.

Uh huh. You do realize that there are no "J's" in the Greek, don't you? There weren't any in the 17th century English, either. Perhaps you should read the 1611? Beyond that, Stan, Scripture didn't start with the KJV.

Indeed, and apparently you are as well, but you have not actually read it.nnLet me succinctly summarize for you. Wallace concludes by saying;
Winer’s opinion notwithstanding, solid linguistic reasons and plenty of phenomenological data were found to support the requirements that Sharp laid down. When substantives meet the requirements of Sharp’s canon, apposition is the result, and inviolably so in the NT. The canon even works outside the twenty-seven books and, hence, ought to be resurrected as a sound principle which has overwhelming validity in all of Greek literature. Consequently, in Titus 2:13 and 2 Pet 1:1 we are compelled to recognize that, on a grammatical level, a heavy burden of proof rests with the one who wishes to deny that “God and Savior” refers to one person, Jesus Christ.

I suggest you read it again;
https://bible.org/article/sharp-redivivus-reexamination-granville-sharp-rule
and this time pay attention to what he is conveying.

Actually, I'd rather let Wallace do his own summarizing: "In native Greek constructions (i.e., not translation Greek), when a single article modifies two substantives connected by kai (thus, article-substantive- kai-substantive), when both substantives are (1) singular (both grammatically and semantically), (2) personal, (3) and common nouns (not proper names or ordinals), they have the same referent." Now he doesn't go into how all of that is also governed by punctuation...which it is, but regardless he has clearly slapped a caviat to Granville Sharp's rule. I suppose you'll be stating that Wallace is a poor linguist. lain:

 

[StanJ]

I don't think so. What exactly do you want me to address head on that you don't think I have?
I'm unaware of any Hebrew word I've used to sidestep any Truth of Scripture. Enlighten me, please.

The ones you avoided and deflected about. Being unaware is not something one should readily admit to in a DISCUSSION, unless it is deliberately intended to deflect.

This is a "truth" that seems to be argued by varying Greek language scholars and complicated by punctuation used in the Koine.

There is no punctuation in Greek, and what EXACTLY is being argued about, and by whom?

I wasn't aware that J.P. Green or the United Bible Society were poor translators.

So you believe THEY did the KJV translation?

Always read the footnotes Stan. Check out footnote b under the ESV.

Make a point IMJ, don't avoid it.

Uh huh. You do realize that there are no "J's" in the Greek, don't you? There weren't any in the 17th century English, either. Perhaps you should read the 1611? Beyond that, Stan, Scripture didn't start with the KJV.

But there IS in English, so what is your point, other than to deflect?
I have the 1611 version. It's pretty much the same as the current KJV, so again, make a point.
Good, I'm glad you're not KJVO, but again, WHAT is your point?

Actually, I'd rather let Wallace do his own summarizing: "In native Greek constructions (i.e., not translation Greek), when a single article modifies two substantives connected by kai (thus, article-substantive- kai-substantive), when both substantives are (1) singular (both grammatically and semantically), (2) personal, (3) and common nouns (not proper names or ordinals), they have the same referent." Now he doesn't go into how all of that is also governed by punctuation...which it is, but regardless he has clearly slapped a caviat to Granville Sharp's rule. I suppose you'll be stating that Wallace is a poor linguist.

So you actually read what he said about Granville Sharp and you still equivocate by using his own words OUT of context?
That is very disingenuous IMO. Maybe others can read the actual article and judge for themselves?

http://www.theopedia.com/articles/547aa992c68a2d535569a742

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Jerusha has done all that is needed.

Yes there are times when the word and is between two nouns that they represent one.

However it is not set in stone.

So then, when we have other scripture distinguishing that the two are not the same one, there is no backing to apply that rule of grammar.

Not only that, but since we have other scripture showing otherwise, we would be ignorant to try and claim that Peter is calling Jesus God.

If that aint enuff fer yuh, Peter gives us that other scripture I speak of in the very next verse.

Notice the proper name as well as title that kills the same one idea by Granville Sharp's own rule.


2 Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,


Context, context, context.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

The actual book is available here:

http://www.biblefood.com/sharp.pdf

AMR

 

[IMJerusha]

The ones you avoided and deflected about. Being unaware is not something one should readily admit to in a DISCUSSION, unless it is deliberately intended to deflect.

And I've asked you what I have avoided or deflected from. You see, I'm happy to answer any question put to me so I'm asking you what your specific question/s is/are. I believe there are some who wish to twist the doctrine of the Trinity into something that was never intended, a dismissal of the three consubstantial persons and there is nothing in Scripture to support that. It's tough enough to find any Scripture supporting the original doctrine let alone the twisted version.

There is no punctuation in Greek,

Yes, there is punctuation in the ancient Greek. It began about 200 years before Yeshua. It's called théseis and there are differing aspects of théseis: hypostigmḗ - a low punctus on the baseline to mark off a komma (unit smaller than a clause);
stigmḕ mésē - a punctus at midheight to mark off a clause (kōlon); and
stigmḕ teleía - a high punctus to mark off a sentence (periodos).

and what EXACTLY is being argued about, and by whom?

Now you're just being obtuse.

So you believe THEY did the KJV translation?

I didn't say that. I did post J.P. Green's Interlinear as well as the UBS' Greek/English Interlinear translation of John 1:18 , specifically the words "in the bosom of the Father" which is found in the KJV 1611 and all subsequent versions of the KJV. You threw my understanding of English context regarding John 1:18 into question and I have merely pointed out that my understanding of the context is the same as many other peoples understanding, that being that Yeshua is not God the Father, He is the Son of God, "in the bosom of the Father." Seeing as how you stated "It says what it says," and you have such an aversion to Hebrew, I thought I'd point out to you that Scripture never said "Jesus" but rather Iesous in the Greek and that is what was in the Geneva before Kingeth Jameth began the 1611 revision of the Bishop's Bible of 1568, neither of which had "j's" in them either. We all would be wise to stay abreast of changes made to Scripture.

Make a point IMJ, don't avoid it.

I believe I've been making plenty of points. I can not force you to acknowledge them. It's like bringing a horse to water....

But there IS in English, so what is your point, other than to deflect? I have the 1611 version. It's pretty much the same as the current KJV, so again, make a point. Good, I'm glad you're not KJVO, but again, WHAT is your point?

When I converse with someone, Stan, it is with the reasonable expectation that they are keeping track of their own words so they can keep up their end of the conversation. If I wanted to converse with myself, I would, but in this case I am conversing (albeit in writing) with you. You stated, "It says what it says..." and my point to you is that it does not say what you and others say it says. It doesn't say that Yeshua is God Himself. Not even Yeshua states that He is God the Father despite those verses you repeatedly post.

So you actually read what he said about Granville Sharp and you still equivocate by using his own words OUT of context?
That is very disingenuous IMO.
Maybe others can read the actual article and judge for themselves?

http://www.theopedia.com/articles/547aa992c68a2d535569a742

His words stand very clearly on their own as the "Cautions in Application" section at that site declares. Thank you for posting that url. It supports my statements.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

See also:

http://www.biblefood.com/articthe2.html

Note: While I am not in agreement with all the content posted at this site, the item above is worthwhile.

AMR

 

[IMJerusha]

See also:

http://www.biblefood.com/articthe2.html

Note: While I am not in agreement with all the content posted at this site, the item above is worthwhile.

AMR

Yes, I love Granville Sharp's way of qualifying the existence of fact with not "that I know of" as if he were in possession of all knowledge of the ancient Greek. It's adorable...sort of like Baptist ministers; they may not be right but they're never in doubt. (I do love Mark Lowry!)

 

[StanJ]

Yes, I love Granville Sharp's way of qualifying the existence of fact with not "that I know of" as if he were in possession of all knowledge of the ancient Greek. It's adorable...sort of like Baptist ministers; they may not be right but they're never in doubt.

He IS an authority on Koine Greek, not ancient Greek, and his authority has been verified by the vast majority of today's pre-eminent Greek scholars.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Yes, I love Granville Sharp's way of qualifying the existence of fact with not "that I know of" as if he were in possession of all knowledge of the ancient Greek. It's adorable...sort of like Baptist ministers; they may not be right but they're never in doubt. (I do love Mark Lowry!)

Yeah, I found it interesting that the dude's in the book AMR posted were actually trying to make up rules for the whole Greek language out of what they thought the bible says.

Hilarical.....

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

 

[IMJerusha]

He IS an authority on Koine Greek, not ancient Greek, and his authority has been verified by the vast majority of today's pre-eminent Greek scholars.

I have a problem with anyone trying to prove what is beyond their scope to prove especially when it's unnecessary to prove it. That aside, Stan, if people want to state that Yeshua is God (the Father) what becomes of the Headship? That POV destroys the Headship. It diminishes Yeshua's obedience to God. No...it literally destroys the necessity for Yeshua to be obedient to God. It's a flat out destructive train of thought; one that I refuse to subscribe to. Immanu-el (another of those Hebrew words you dislike) means God with us but I take that to mean, from all else in Scripture, that God came to us through His Son not that He was/is His Son. To state otherwise is also to call Yeshua a liar.

John 5:19 "Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does."

John 12:49 "For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken."

John 8:28 “When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me."

Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven."