Christians:Is Belief in the Trinity Required to Call Someone a Christian?

[roli]

I have heard arguments about this since I became a Christian 25 years ago. There are some Christians who say that in order to be a "true" Christian, that person must believe in the Trinity.

The Trinity isn't actually taught in the Bible. Jesus Himself never spoke of it, Paul never spoke of it. I studied a bit about how they came up with the Trinity- different verses they strung together to prove it exists.

The fact has been for the past few years I have had a lot of questions about it. I accepted it without question for the first 20 years of my faith and then after a debate on a Christian site I used to post at (but haven't lately) I began to question it.

I am not saying I don't believe in it, I am just questioning it.

I am asking the other Christians on this board if questioning or not believing in the Trinity can stop one from being a Christian in your eyes.

Jesus says, being, saved,or born again is synonymos with wind John 3:The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit."

Salvation is a gift from God, by believing in his son as the atoning sacrifice, but it is an act brought about by the Holy Spirit
As you said,the word trinity is not in scripture and in and of itself is not , nor has it ever been a means to salvation.
The bible says Rom 1:16 "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation for everyone who believes"...for in it the righteousness of God is revealed....
Jhn 1:14-13But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
2Cr 7:10 For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death.

As you said, there are several pieces of text that refer to the mentioning and the distinguishing of the Holy Spirit. As a matter of fact, the whole of scripture identifies God the father, Jesus Christ the Son and the power and person of the Holy Spirit. They all work together in the process of salvation.

I guess what I'm saying is that to be born again or saved is not through knowledge of the Godhead or trinity, it is recognising personal sin and immediately seeing your need for a savior, it is an inner witness of conviction brought about by the Holy Spirit that leads us to call on Christ and this is all gifts from God the Father.

 

[Dunemeister]

There are only two things required to consider someone a Christian (Romans 10:9):

(1) Open confession of Jesus as Lord (implying belief in the divinity of Jesus);
(2) Believing that God has raised him from the dead.

There's a great deal else that Christians ought to believe. Among these things I'd include the Trinity. However, I wouldn't automatically consider a person non-Christian merely because they didn't understand or couldn't come to accept, Trinitarian theology.

 

[Katzpur]

I don't think I would use "physically one" to describe the Trinity. God does not have a body, (though now Christ does) so the Persons of the Trinity are "one in being" not "one in flesh".

Okay, we're making some progress here. What I don't understand, I think, is the phrase, "one in being." If it means that both the Father and the Son have the same divine attributes, then I would agree with you. It's really just the word "substance" that throws the Latter-day Saints for a loop.

Or is it true that the LDS faith teaches that God the Father has a body?

Yes, that's right.

And did the Son have a body before the Incarnation?

No, we believe that He was a spirit prior to His birth in Bethlehem.

Secondly, you don't find biblical problems with Tritheism?

No, we don't.

"Hear O Israel, the Lord your God, the Lord is one"

Yes, the Book of Mormon actually teaches that, too. That statement says that they are one, but not how they are one.

I don't believe they taught it as Nicea defined it, though nor do I believe that they taught tritheism (and they certainly did not teach that the Father had a body).

I could actually give you some evidence that they did.

They taught that Christ was God, the Son of God, and the Father was God and that the Holy Spirit was the active power of God among them. They did not yet reconcile how this could all be so- by Nicea this had been done.

I agree (more or less) with your first statement. I agree fully with your second statement. I just don't believe their conclusion was inspired of God.

(Thanks for your civil response, by the way. This is why I like debating with Catholics. They know how to disagree without being disagreeable. :yes: )

 

[No*s]

I have heard arguments about this since I became a Christian 25 years ago. There are some Christians who say that in order to be a "true" Christian, that person must believe in the Trinity.

The Trinity isn't actually taught in the Bible. Jesus Himself never spoke of it, Paul never spoke of it. I studied a bit about how they came up with the Trinity- different verses they strung together to prove it exists.

The fact has been for the past few years I have had a lot of questions about it. I accepted it without question for the first 20 years of my faith and then after a debate on a Christian site I used to post at (but haven't lately) I began to question it.

I am not saying I don't believe in it, I am just questioning it.

I am asking the other Christians on this board if questioning or not believing in the Trinity can stop one from being a Christian in your eyes.

On one level, yes. It is the ancient belief in Christianity and is more important even than the Bible for it precedes the Bible. The Trinity, and a proper understanding of it, is indispensable for a sound view of God.

On a more "economic" level, that's God's business. If I see a unitarian, a pagan, or even an atheist in the afterlife, then who am I to say to God, "You shouldn't have done this!"? The general answer, though, is the one above.

 

[Breathe]

(1) Open confession of Jesus as Lord (implying belief in the divinity of Jesus);

Hmmm, but how does one arrive at Lord = God, instead of Lord = King Messiah?

For example, one could easily look at this and think it otherwise, especially with Acts 2:34-36 there. They could use this to argue that Jesus is not God (as there looks to be a distinction between them), and therefore, no trinity, right? Even with Romans 10:9 they could say that there is a distinction between Lord and God.

What is your perspective on this?

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

Hmmm, but how does one arrive at Lord = God, instead of Lord = King Messiah?

Because the manner in which Kyrios is applied to Jesus is exactly the same sense in which it is applied to God- and Israel can not serve two Lord's, but her very identity is constituted in the fact that she is called to serve the one Lord, the one Kyrios/Adonai.

Anything short of worshiping the single divine being is a horrendous departure from the faith of Israel. This is ultimately why the Church opted in favor of the Nicean definition, despite the fact that we know some church members (perhaps even fathers) regarded Jesus as a kind of secondary divinity. Such opinion, once we step back, is inconsistent with the whole of revelation regarding the person of God.

 

[Jordan St. Francis]

(Thanks for your civil response, by the way. This is why I like debating with Catholics. They know how to disagree without being disagreeable. :yes: )

And thanks for your patience Katzpur, I know very little of the LDS faith, I am always unsure of whether what I think is taught among the Latter-Day- Saints is, in fact, what is done.

Yes, the Book of Mormon actually teaches that, too. That statement says that they are one, but not how they are one.

This doesn't quite make sense to me, however, neither is it truly in accord with the intent of Scripture. If Christ is Lord and the Father is Lord, yet the two are not in essence one, then are there not truly "two Lords" (who nevertheless have "one will") rendering the Shema a false statement?

I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior... I am the Lord, your Holy One, the Creator of Israel, your King...I am the first and the last; besides me there is no god" (Isaiah 43).

Tritheism, or any form of polytheism, is explicitly ruled out here by Isaiah. The Lord is not several divinities united in purpose, not a plurality of essences, but a single being, a single essence.

The very reason Christians came to the Trinitarian conclusion was because they found in this flesh and blood man "the Lord" who is precisely such because he is "the Son", who furthermore is the living revelation of "the Father". The Son's lordship is the Father's, that is why what he brings is the Father's Kingdom, not the son's kingdom, for the Son is the Father's Kingdom in person.

It was always understood to be a mystery beyond comprehension which explodes our conceptions of both personhood and essence, but leads back towards the Letter of John which says boldly that "God is love"- and love, as we know, is relatedness, arises out of and between persons. So the God-who- is- one has been in himself, from the beginning, the eternal embrace of love...from which all subsequent relationships flow.

 

[Breathe]

Because the manner in which Kyrios is applied to Jesus is exactly the same sense in which it is applied to God- and Israel can not serve two Lord's, but her very identity is constituted in the fact that she is called to serve the one Lord, the one Kyrios/Adonai.

Oo, really? Thanks for explaining this.
But what about those who see such a distinction such as in the passages I've noted, for example?

 

[Renji]

It is not important of whatever you want it to call (Trinity, etc). What matters most is you believe that there is a Father (in Heaven), Son (Jesus Christ) and Holy Spirit ( Guide) in short, God.

 

[Scott C.]

There are only two things required to consider someone a Christian (Romans 10:9):

(1) Open confession of Jesus as Lord (implying belief in the divinity of Jesus);
(2) Believing that God has raised him from the dead.

There's a great deal else that Christians ought to believe. Among these things I'd include the Trinity. However, I wouldn't automatically consider a person non-Christian merely because they didn't understand or couldn't come to accept, Trinitarian theology.

I would add "by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." If a disciple of Christ is a Christian, which he is, then love for one another is also a Christian qualifier.

 

[Green Gaia]

I think traditional Unitarians would disagree that belief in the Trinity is required to be Christian.

American Unitarian Conference

Erdélyi Unitárius Egyház ( Unitarian Church in Hungary and the Transylvanian Unitarian Church)

Unitarian Christian Association (UK)

Home Page of the Unitarians in Great Britain


Anyone want to tell these Hungarian ladies they are not Christian?

 

[Dunemeister]

I would add "by this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." If a disciple of Christ is a Christian, which he is, then love for one another is also a Christian qualifier.

I certainly agree with you 110%. There's no question that there's an ethical side to one's claim to be Christian, but since the question in the OP is about what's necessary to believe, I didn't go there.

 

[Dunemeister]

Anyone want to tell these Hungarian ladies they are not Christian?

Certainly not I! I'd only punt to the two-question catechism St. Paul used:

(1) Do you acknowledge that Jesus is the Jewish Messiah, and the Lord God incarnate?
(2) Do you believe that God has raised him from the dead?

A pair of yesses means that you're in. The Christian faith is obviously much more sophisticated than this parsed catechism, yet an affirmative answer to these questions means that I'm forced to regard the person as a Christian, WHATEVER ELSE THE PERSON MIGHT ALSO BELIEVE. These two points presuppose and entail no small number of other propositions, and the EDUCATED believer will have some understanding of those (e.g. monotheism is presupposed by acknowledging Jesus as Christ/Messiah, since that acknowledgment presupposes an understanding of what Christians call the Old Testament as authoritative).

 

[sojourner]

I don't feel that one's relationship with Christ is defined by what one believes about Jesus. I feel that one's relationship with Christ is defined by the same parameters as any other relationship: How one acts in that relationship.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Some churches especially the Roman and orthodox churches and those that sprung directly from them Do believe in the Trinity. That is not to say that every member of those churches either understand nor believe the concept.
From my point of view it came about by a politico-religious compromise, that may not be understood by Jesus or any of the apostles... To argue that that though the concept had not been invented during their life times, they would have believed in it had it been mooted, is pure nonsense.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I think traditional Unitarians would disagree that belief in the Trinity is required to be Christian.

American Unitarian Conference

Erdélyi Unitárius Egyház ( Unitarian Church in Hungary and the Transylvanian Unitarian Church)

Unitarian Christian Association (UK)

Home Page of the Unitarians in Great Britain


Anyone want to tell these Hungarian ladies they are not Christian?

Many Churches do not consider Unitarians to be Christian
This is the official belief of most churches in the UK.
Under the same trinitarian belief neither are the LDS considered Christian.

However ask any Christian in the street and the answer would be much more mixed.
The people usually lead the way......

 

[Dunemeister]

Some churches especially the Roman and orthodox churches and those that sprung directly from them Do believe in the Trinity. That is not to say that every member of those churches either understand nor believe the concept.
From my point of view it came about by a politico-religious compromise, that may not be understood by Jesus or any of the apostles... To argue that that though the concept had not been invented during their life times, they would have believed in it had it been mooted, is pure nonsense.

The trinitarian formulation of Nicea was BOTH a politico-religious compromise AND entirely correct. How's that?

 

[ChristineES]

I, personally, have always believed that anyone who follows the commandments of Jesus to be Christian- no matter else they believed. That isn't a very popular idea while in a Baptist Church.

 

[Katzpur]

I, personally, have always believed that anyone who follows the commandments of Jesus to be Christian- no matter else they believed. That isn't a very popular idea while in a Baptist Church.

I'd say that the person would have to also consider himself to be a Christian. That may sound like a no-brainer, but there are a lot of people who don't consider themselves to be Christian who believe in the same principles Jesus taught, i.e. love, forgiveness, mercy, charity, etc. They try to live their lives in accordance with these principles, but not because they were trying to follow Jesus' commandments. Almost all of the world's great religious traditions, for instance, believe something that could be described as "the Golden Rule," which would roughly correspond to what Jesus taught about loving one's neighbor as oneself.

 

[roli]

I'd say that the person would have to also consider himself to be a Christian. That may sound like a no-brainer, but there are a lot of people who don't consider themselves to be Christian who believe in the same principles Jesus taught, i.e. love, forgiveness, mercy, charity, etc. They try to live their lives in accordance with these principles, but not because they were trying to follow Jesus' commandments. Almost all of the world's great religious traditions, for instance, believe something that could be described as "the Golden Rule," which would roughly correspond to what Jesus taught about loving one's neighbor as oneself.

Maybe having a clear definition of what the word "Christian" means ,would be appropriate right about here, as 86% of the world claim christian status, but are they really according to the word.

Christian =Christianos Christian, a follower of Christ
root word ---- Christos=Christ = "anointed"
In John 3 Jesus clearly identified who it was that was born of God,who it was that would enter and see the kingdom of God... and it certainly was'nt by mere association to denominations, traditons, set rules and protocols or entitlement because one generically believes in some principals about Jesus.
Jhn 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
I think the bible is accurate in saying so many people are decieved into thinking they are christian by merely following ,laws/commandments,traditions.

Intellectual belief is nothing more than emotionalism and sensationalism wrapped up together under the veneer of Christianity.
1Cr 1:26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are,

Remembering what John tells us concerning those who are truly Christ's and how they become that way. It's about receiving Christ, which when happens ,one is instantly indwelt by the Holy Spirit, which of course comes about by initially believing in him.
When one receives him, they have an encounter with the Holy Ghost that changes their very DNA
Jhn 1:12But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, [even] to them that believe on his name:Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God

Qualifying questions, that will bring assurance and clarity on who is truly Christian
1) Does God's spirit witness to your spirit that you are of God.
1Jo 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Cr 12:3Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
Rom 8:14For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.
Rom 8:16The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
Eph 4:30And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption
1Jo 4:13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.

The law was never a means to save anyone, but following the law only condemned a person,it only pointed us to our sins, Romans says, 3:23 ...by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Gal 3:24The law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ, that we may be justified by "faith"But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster..

.......justified "FAITH"

And than Paul says ,we who are christians are no longer under law.
We walk by faith in what Jesus has accomplished in fulfilling the law, not in what laws we can fulfill.