You Don't Need to Believe in the Trinity to be Saved?

[2timothy316]

"Correct view" you say. Clear this up for me. You mean one must believe in the basic belief of the trinity to be saved right?

No, I’m saying the complete opposite. I’m explicitly saying one doesn’t have to have the correct/true view of God’s nature (trinitarian or not) to be saved. I’m saying one can be wrong about the trinity and still be saved.

Is this true? One doesn't have to believe in the trinity to be saved?

[onewithhim]

"Correct view" you say. Clear this up for me. You mean one must believe in the basic belief of the trinity to be saved right?

No, I’m saying the complete opposite. I’m explicitly saying one doesn’t have to have the correct/true view of God’s nature (trinitarian or not) to be saved. I’m saying one can be wrong about the trinity and still be saved.

Is this true? One doesn't have to believe in the trinity to be saved?

Ephesians 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.(NKJV)

We are save by the grace of God through faith, and we do good works because we are already saved by God's grace thru faith.
Doing good works in Mat 28:19. (the Trinity concept) is the result of being saved and not to be save.
Notice the word "name" in the verse is in singular form. One God in three person.
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,(NKJV)

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." - John 3:18 (KJV)

If a person doesn't believe that Jesus is God isn't that person condemned?
If a person isn't condemned because they don't believe Jesus is God, then why is the trinity important if being saved doesn't depend on believing Jesus is God?

As salvation is God's grace through faith.
A person that doesn't believe that Jesus is God is he condemned or not? I am not a judge, God is. But understanding of your quoted verse specially the last phrase "Son of God" notice capital S.
If good works is the result of being saved, working on the great commission (Mat 28:19) also is the result of being saved, I believe.

So, there are two ways to be saved, grace and works, but believing Jesus is God isn't one of them? Also, you didn't address why the trinity was important.

I agree. Faith goes along with works for ways for salvation, and believing Jesus is God isn't one of them.

[Capbook]

"Correct view" you say. Clear this up for me. You mean one must believe in the basic belief of the trinity to be saved right?

No, I’m saying the complete opposite. I’m explicitly saying one doesn’t have to have the correct/true view of God’s nature (trinitarian or not) to be saved. I’m saying one can be wrong about the trinity and still be saved.

Is this true? One doesn't have to believe in the trinity to be saved?

Ephesians 2:8-10
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.(NKJV)

We are save by the grace of God through faith, and we do good works because we are already saved by God's grace thru faith.
Doing good works in Mat 28:19. (the Trinity concept) is the result of being saved and not to be save.
Notice the word "name" in the verse is in singular form. One God in three person.
Matthew 28:19
Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,(NKJV)

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." - John 3:18 (KJV)

If a person doesn't believe that Jesus is God isn't that person condemned?
If a person isn't condemned because they don't believe Jesus is God, then why is the trinity important if being saved doesn't depend on believing Jesus is God?

As salvation is God's grace through faith.
A person that doesn't believe that Jesus is God is he condemned or not? I am not a judge, God is. But understanding of your quoted verse specially the last phrase "Son of God" notice capital S.
If good works is the result of being saved, working on the great commission (Mat 28:19) also is the result of being saved, I believe.

So, there are two ways to be saved, grace and works, but believing Jesus is God isn't one of them? Also, you didn't address why the trinity was important.

I agree. Faith goes along with works for ways for salvation, and believing Jesus is God isn't one of them.

I believe the text says, worshiping Jesus is vain, as they teaches as doctrine the commandment of man.(Jesus)
Mark 7:7
And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'(NKJV)

[JehovahsWitness]

One doesn't have to believe in the trinity to be saved?

If the trinity was essential for salvation, Jesus would certainly have taught his disciples about it. He would have used illustrations*, explained it and explained why believing in it was essential. He would have, at the very least uttered the word "trinity" (or a synonym) .

Regarding illustrations : They had eggs in his day so if trinitarians can think of explaining the trinity is like an eggs made up of three elements : Shell, yoke and white, then why couldnt Jesus?

They had families in those days , so Jesus could have likening his relationship to his God a that of a TWIN

His disciples were familiar with trinitarian godships, all Jesus had to say is : " We are like Osiris, Isis, and Horus only better"!

[Capbook]

One doesn't have to believe in the trinity to be saved?

If the trinity was essential for salvation, Jesus would certainly have taught his disciples about it. He would have used illustrations*, explained it and explained why believing in it was essential. He would have, at the very least uttered the word "trinity" (or a synonym) .

Regarding illustrations : They had eggs in his day so if trinitarians can think of explaining the trinity is like an eggs made up of three elements : Shell, yoke and white, then why couldnt Jesus?

They had families in those days , so Jesus could have likening his relationship to his God a that of a TWIN

His disciples were familiar with trinitarian godships, all Jesus had to say is : " We are like Osiris, Isis, and Horus only better"!

Jesus haven't uttered Trinity and also is the word Bible.
But the concept of Trinity is strong in Mat 28:19. Singular "name" used for Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Another illustration of Trinity;
One human
Our mind and heart - as the Father, whom sent Jesus to the world. John 3:16
Our word - as Jesus, Word become flesh, all things were created through Him.(logos) Col 1:16
Our actions - as the HS, who is here with us in action. Ezek 36:27

[JehovahsWitness]

Jesus haven't uttered Trinity and also is the word Bible.

True the word "bible" isnt in the bible but the concept and the word "scripture" and sacred books* /scrolls are.

* The word bible come from the root meaning of " books"

To learn more please see other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BEST TRANSLATION

* bible interpretation

[Capbook]

Jesus haven't uttered Trinity and also is the word Bible.

True the word "bible" isnt in the bible but the concept and the word "scripture" and sacred books* /scrolls are.

* The word bible come from the root meaning of " books"

To learn more please see other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BEST TRANSLATION

* bible interpretation

And so is Trinity, Matthew 28:19 the concept is there.
The union of these three names in the form of baptism proves that the Son and Holy Spirit are EQUAL with the Father.
(from Barnes' Notes)

Charles Spurgeon recommended Barnes' notes, calling them “Thoroughly good.” (quote online)

[onewithhim]

Jesus haven't uttered Trinity and also is the word Bible.

True the word "bible" isnt in the bible but the concept and the word "scripture" and sacred books* /scrolls are.

* The word bible come from the root meaning of " books"

To learn more please see other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BEST TRANSLATION

* bible interpretation

And so is Trinity, Matthew 28:19 the concept is there.
The union of these three names in the form of baptism proves that the Son and Holy Spirit are EQUAL with the Father.
(from Barnes' Notes)

Charles Spurgeon recommended Barnes' notes, calling them “Thoroughly good.” (quote online)

Just HOW is the concept of the trinity in Matthew 28:19? Nothing there proves that the three are equal. It is not a good verse to try and prove the trinity.

[Capbook]

Jesus haven't uttered Trinity and also is the word Bible.

True the word "bible" isnt in the bible but the concept and the word "scripture" and sacred books* /scrolls are.

* The word bible come from the root meaning of " books"

To learn more please see other posts related to...

THE BIBLE , HERMENEUTICS* and ... BEST TRANSLATION

* bible interpretation

And so is Trinity, Matthew 28:19 the concept is there.
The union of these three names in the form of baptism proves that the Son and Holy Spirit are EQUAL with the Father.
(from Barnes' Notes)

Charles Spurgeon recommended Barnes' notes, calling them “Thoroughly good.” (quote online)

Just HOW is the concept of the trinity in Matthew 28:19? Nothing there proves that the three are equal. It is not a good verse to try and prove the trinity.

That is what they call grammatical exegesis. Why a definite article (name in singular) placed before Father, Son and HS. That I understand as one God in three persons.

[JehovahsWitness]

... a definite article (name in singular) placed before Father, Son and HS. That I understand as one God in three persons.

That's nonsense. The expression "in the name of..." means "under the authority of"/ representing. This can refer to an individual (In the name of Jesus) , an institution or an entity (in the name of the law*).

Listing w(as in the case of Mat 2i) two individuals and an entity does not render them all EQUAL, much less all Almighty God.

* NOTE "In The name of the law" does not mean that "the law" is a person, with a '
name such as Bill or Jane

[rstrats]

I think it might be better to change "the" to "a".