is correct trinity belief required for salvation? - it's not in the OT

The doctrine of the Trinity is not explicitly taught in the New Testament either, though in a number of places it is certainly implied.

The Triune Nature of God is also implied in the Old Testament starting with Genesis 1:26.

The term Spirit of God is used about 26 times in the Old Testament.

Also in the Old Testament we see numerous pre-incarnate appearances of God the Son, notably Genesis chapter 18.

 

The Son of God also shows up in the fiery furnace with Shadrach Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 3)

-DeaconLew

 

Salvation depends on whether we believe that Jesus is the Son of God. I would say that most people in the church world today, especially evangelicals, do not understand what that means, unlike the church of generations past.

 

Some Baptist pastors suffer from the same ailment as our oneness brethren! The symptoms may not be identical, but the diagnosis is certain. As for the prognosis—only God knows for sure!

 

Oneness bretheren? The people of the Oneness movement are NOT our breteren. I say this with a heavy heart because my in-laws are UPC. My wife grew up in that destructive cult. Some of the layity may be saved inspite of their ignorance, but the pastors that preach that destructive doctrine are wolves!
I got maried in a UP Church, they wouldn't let us exchange rings because of their ban on jewlery. Kinda let's you know where their salvation lies, doesn't it?
It is a self-rightous works salvation theological system that denies the eternality of Jesus Christ.
They are closer bretheren with Mormans and JW's than Baptist!

<>< I'm Praying for my In-laws:
Eaglewing

 

Most of the heresies came from Baptists, if we go by the thesis that the original church and its members were Baptists, if not by name, then by doctrine and practice.

The next thing we'll know, some Baptist preacher will say the haircut we believe Jesus has reflects on our salvation.

There are NO requirements for eternal salvation, BEFORE, DURING or AFTER the fact. Salvation is ALL OF the Lord, before, during and after. OF the Lord means it is the Lord who decides who His people are, and who are not, and based on that HE, not their faith, not their theology, not their creed, not their race, not their geographical location, not their chronological presence on earth, HE, saved them.

Romans clearly tells us that when we were YET sinners, God commendeth His love towards us, that while we were YET WITHOUT STRENGTH, Christ died for us.

While we were faithless, blaspheming, heretical, fornicating, hypocritical, lying, thieving, sinners Christ DIED for us (that is, those whom He chose unto eternal salvation).

WITHOUT STRENGTH means without the Holy Spirit, without His might, WITHOUT FAITH, without any theological wisdom, Christ DIED for us.

Tell that Baptist preacher to read the Scriptures, not his notes in Seminary.

 

To answer the OP, initially no. But salvation does depend on us knowing Who Jesus was/is and His mission, which does link in to Trinitarian Doctrine to a degree. And, likewise as with the question also posed here earlier "Do you need to know the Bible to be saved?", the answer is "initially, no, but as you progress in discipleship one would expect you to come to this position very quickly". The alternative is that we end up worshipping a false image of God, like the JWs, Christadelphians and UPC.

An analogy (like all analogies it is imperfect but bear with me ) is this: suppose you wanted to look after giraffes at the zoo; you know nothing about giraffes and accordingly go on a course to learn about them. You can start with the basics of "giraffes are four-legged herbivorous mammals that live in tropical Africa". So far, so good, you've got the basics and a firm foundation. But suppose a few weeks later you were insisting that giraffes had grey skin, big ears and a trunk (either because you were erroneously taught that on the course or because you refused to believe that giraffes had blotchy fur, long necks and legs), then you would be greatly in error and unfit to be a giraffe keeper.

So there are some doctrines which, if not adhered to, turn God into an elephant instead of a giraffe. Or something...I'll get my coat

Yours in Christ

Matt

 

One must believe in God The father, of course, if one believes in His Son Jesus as Lord, Savior, and God also. And Jesus says one may blaspheme Jesus & be forgiven, but if one blasphemes the HOLY SPIRIT, that sin will NOT be forgiven. Therefore if one truly believes in JESUS, then that one will believe all His statements.

Not only did Jesus make the blasphemy statement, but He said he would send the Holy Spirit IN HIS PLACE(as Teacher/Guide, NOT as Savior) after He had returned to heaven. Now, who could take God's place but GOD? Therefore, to be a true Christian, one will automatically believe in the Holy Trinity, as Jesus clearly defines the Deity of His Father and of the Holy Spirit as well as of Himself.

 

My first inclination would be to insist on belief in the trinity for salvation, but there are a lot of people here on the bb who got saved before they ever cracked open a bible, stepped into a church, or knew anything abut the trinity.

Food for thought.

 

That's not exactly conclusive. While that is in the very least a possible implication, it is not the likeliest explanation. It relies oon the translation of the passage to read "Son of God". The phrases "son of God" and "sons of God" in the OT are not Messianic references. They typically refer to anything from "humankind in general" to "messengers of God" to "a body of believers". For example, in OT terms, we would be referred to as sons of God.

However, a better contextually accurate translation for the verse in Daniel 3 is "a son of the gods". The fact that Nebuchadnezzar was polytheistic lends support for the context as well. The fouth person in the fire was most likely an angel, or messenger, of the Lord sent to protect them from the flames.

 

Matt,

Are we to understand from this comment that a man can be saved without a correct belief in the Trinity, but that if he fails to ever come to a correct belief in the Trinity, and perhaps comes to a very false belief in the Trinity, that his salvation will be forfeited?

 

Oneness bretheren? The people of the Oneness movement are NOT our breteren. I say this with a heavy heart because my in-laws are UPC. My wife grew up in that destructive cult. Some of the layity may be saved inspite of their ignorance, but the pastors that preach that destructive doctrine are wolves!
I got maried in a UP Church, they wouldn't let us exchange rings because of their ban on jewlery. Kinda let's you know where their salvation lies, doesn't it?
It is a self-rightous works salvation theological system that denies the eternality of Jesus Christ.
They are closer bretheren with Mormans and JW's than Baptist!

<>< I'm Praying for my In-laws:
Eaglewing </font>[/QUOTE]Oneness theology extends over a broad spectrum of beliefs. The United Pentecostal Church (UP Church) is doctrinally an extremist group dangerously far from even the middle of that spectrum.

 

Matt,

Are we to understand from this comment that a man can be saved without a correct belief in the Trinity, but that if he fails to ever come to a correct belief in the Trinity, and perhaps comes to a very false belief in the Trinity, that his salvation will be forfeited?

</font>[/QUOTE]I don't if Matt was saying that, however you don't need to know doctrine to be saved. but if you are saved you will begin to hunger and thirst for rightousness. You will eat the bread of life and drink the living water and be filled. the holy spirit will guide you into all truth if you let him.
However, Mathew 24:24 seems to sugest that it may be possible to decieve even the elect. these elect may then loose their assurance of salvation. Those who willing preach and teach false doctrine are wolves,and false christs.
Matthew 24:24 (ESV)
For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.

Hebrews 10:26-27 (ESV)
For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, [27] but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries.

 

Agreed!

 

Matt,

Are we to understand from this comment that a man can be saved without a correct belief in the Trinity, but that if he fails to ever come to a correct belief in the Trinity, and perhaps comes to a very false belief in the Trinity, that his salvation will be forfeited?

</font>[/QUOTE]Perhaps it is an indication that he was never indwelled by the Holy Spirit to start with.

While an understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity is not a qualification for salvation, the deity of Christ is integral to His sufficiency to pay our sin debt.

 

Good point Deacon.

 

Kinda think that whether the Trinity appears in the OT or not is irrelevant. Men were saved by faith in the OT, but the content of that faith varies widely depending on where they are in the time line of God’s progressive revelation. Abraham was saved by faith that God would be faithful to His promise.

I have heard many people say that we are saved by faith looking back to the cross and that OT saints were saved by faith looking forward to the cross. While it is true that we find the protoevangelium (first promise of the gospel) in Gen 3:15 it is absurd to maintain that OT saints anticipated and understood the cross. Even THREE years of up close and personal ministry by the Lord Jesus HIMSELF did not make the cross clear to the 12/11. Peter, the first, was STILL fighting the idea in Gethsemane!

OT faith was not sufficient for salvation, once Jesus died on the cross. The disciples of John at Ephesus had to transition from OT faith to NT faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus. SO, whether or not it is in the OT is not crucial to the question, IMHO.

A person is saved by grace through faith in the substitutionary atonement. They do not have to understand ALL the details, nor do they have to understand the doctrine of the Trinity to be (or stay) saved. I would suggest that most believers who are properly discipled will come to an understanding and acceptance of the Trinity. I would not suggest that someone who denied the Trinity was lost, anymore than I would suggest that a believer who committed adultery and murder was lost. I would suggest that failure to accept the Trinity and a life of sin SHOULD motivate someone to check out their faith to make sure that they are indeed “in the Lord”.

Someone mentioned the unpardonable sin earlier, not applicable here. The Jewish leaders rejected clear testimony by the miracles that Jesus was indeed the promised Messiah. Even the common people recognized that the healing of the deaf, dumb, and lame was a fulfillment of Isa 35. Notice that based on the rejection of the leaders of the nation, Jesus BEGAN to teach in parables. I do not believe the offer of the Kingdom was on the table after this rejection by the leaders, that is why Jesus shifted the focus of His ministry at that point. THE unpardonable sin cannot be committed today. The Holy Spirit is not directly testifying to the Jews that their Messiah is here. Jesus is not doing miracles on the earth in His flesh today. It is unpardonable to finally reject the Holy Spirit’s conviction that Jesus is the Savior today, but that is not “the unpardonable sin” of Matthew 12, IMHO.

rjprince

 

We might also note that in Peter's message to the Gentiles at the house of Cornelius, there was no mention of the Trinity before their salvation. Same with the Ephesian jailor and his family. If correct understanding of the Trinity was essential, why was it not a part of Peter and Paul's witness?

 

Matt,

Are we to understand from this comment that a man can be saved without a correct belief in the Trinity, but that if he fails to ever come to a correct belief in the Trinity, and perhaps comes to a very false belief in the Trinity, that his salvation will be forfeited?

</font>[/QUOTE]Not really for us to judge, but I believe that's likely (either he forfeits his salvation or was never saved, depending on whether you believe in OSAS, a subject on which I profess to be agnostic ). There comes a point where one has to say "hang on a minute, you're describing an elephant, not a giraffe!"

Yours in Christ

Matt