Trinity -- Modalism -- ????

They do not deny YOUR concept of the Trinity but they deny the BIBLICAL concept of the Trinity.

You do not understand the Biblical concept of the Trinity or you would not even say such a thing.

They are historically called the ONENESS movement. They do not believe in the separate existence of either the Father or the Spirit. Thus the Father and Spirit do not exist except as schizophenic personalities of Jesus Christ.

Do you beleive in the SEPARATE conscious existence of the Father and Spirit?

Be careful, you are at the brink of denying the true God and distorting him yourself.

 

Biblicist...

Oh really?

Here is my understanding of the Trinity...

God is a trinity of persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

The Father is not the same person as the Son; the Son is not the same person as the Holy Spirit; and the Holy Spirit is not the same person as Father.

They are not three gods and not three beings. They are three distinct persons; yet, they are all the one God. Each has a will, can speak, can love, etc., and these are demonstrations of personhood.

They are in absolute perfect harmony consisting of one substance. They are coeternal, coequal, and copowerful. If any one of the three were removed, there would be no God.

And if you have issue with my understanding of the Trinity, you can take it up with these guys...

http://carm.org/trinity

 

You have stated it correctly but do you actually believe what you have stated?

You state "THERE WOULD BE NO GOD" if any one of them as YOU DEFINED them were removed? Do you actually believe that?

UPC and the Oneness movement remove TWO of the three as YOU DEFINED them? Would their God be the God you defined and the Bible defines?

 

That sums up the Trinity quite nicely.....:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

No one wants to stake their position here on whether the one above is saved or not?

I'm seeing that it must the belief around here that unless one believes the Gospel and has a solid trinitarian belief they cannot be saved. So much for instantaneous salvation via the Gospel, right?

 

One does not need to understand the Trinity to believe in the gospel and be saved. However, if one rejects the Trinity then they do not accept the Jesus of the gospel and therefore are embracing "another Jesus" thus "another gospel" and are rejecting the true God of the Bible - Jn. 17:3.

Ignorance is normal and can be corrected through teaching (Mt. 28:20) but repudiation of an absolute essential truth of salvation (Jn. 17:2-3; 2 Jn. 9-11) requires correction prior to believing in the gospel just as much as a person who does not see himself as a sinner requires correction before any genuine repentance and faith can be expressed in the gospel. Not merely the proper provision of the gospel must be embraced but the proper Person of the gospel must be embraced. Look at John 5:24 and see whom one must beleive in to have eternal life:

24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.


True salvation includes the work of all Three Persons of the Godhead. To reject one is to reject all.

 

I agree 100%. We are saved by grace through faith, not by our thoughts/opinions. After being saved, then Gods causes us to grow in knowledge, revealling Himself to us through His written word.

 

I believe biblicist asked Alive in Christ, if he accepts modalism interpretation of the trinity

 

My friend. That is a bit of a strawman. What the argument here is, does one REJECT the view of the biblical trinity. It's one thing to be ignorant, it's another to totally reject.

 

My friend. I agree! which is why the Holy Spirit will not allow someone to remain in ignorance nor fully reject the truth on such an important matter of salvation.

 

I know what the argument is, I added one myself.

 

The way he expressed the Trinity is the correct view, IMO. Now, if he holds to the modalist view, it wasn't expressed in the words he wrote in that post.

 

You may know the argument but his point is valid. To be confused and ignorant is one thing but to reject the truth is another thing. You cannot come to the gospel rejecting the truth of who Jesus Christ really is! He is not a schizophrenic with three personalities. That is "another Jesus" and thus "another gospel" which only "another spirit" would be confirming as truth.

 

ushering in hallelujah chorus!!!

 

Biblicist....

Regarding the trinity, you said...

:tonofbricks:

Yes...I reeeeealy believe it that way. :wavey:

 

As a sinner, how much about Jesus did we really know? I knew He was/is the Son of God, but I knew nothing about all the infiniteness of the Godhead. After being saved, God began revealling Himself in greater detail through His written word.

 

You're getting bent and twisted over nothing. Did I say one can come to the Gospel rejecting who Jesus Christ really is? Exactly, I didn't. :thumbs:

My contention is that one can be saved without a concise understanding of the Trinity.

 

Exactly. No one preached to me "What do you think about the Trinity?" handing me a questionairre, and if I failed, told me I was going to hell. :laugh:

As a matter of fact, I only knew I was lost in my sins, and that He was my Savior, and that only He could save me, being the Son of the living God.

 

God is One, see Mark 12:32; 1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19. God is the Father, John 5:18. God is the Son, see John 1:1. God is the Holy Spirit, John 4:24. God is all these at the same time.

 

If that would be the case with all sinners, the LoF would being crammed full with us all. None of us as sinners could pass that test. Thank God for Grace.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: Me too.