SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
See Opportunities to Serve with SermonIndex
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : What doctrines are essential for salvation and which aren't?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

Quote:
Orthodox, Good point . This could be a perfect example of what I pointed out in my previous posts. I grew up in a christian environment and always heard that CS Lewis and Chronicles of Narnia were the "bees knees", so to speak. As I've grown in my faith I've come to hold differing views than what Lewis would. Case in point, when I entered that signature I had only been saved for less than a year- definately a babe in Christ (and maybe still so). So, I've never gotten around to changing it but I can certainly see where you would be justified in calling me out on that one In Christ Joe



Just want to see you be consistent.

I, personally, don't have a problem with Lewis since his positions are more orthodox than most evangelicals.

 2009/10/9 20:28
jlosinski
Member



Joined: 2006/9/11
Posts: 294
North Pole, Alaska

 Re:

with all due respect, Muslims and others that hold to a monotheistic perspective are not hindered by doctrinal differences, but rather their rejection of Christ and love of sin.

would you mind expounding on your beliefs concerning your idea of the trinity or who God is? Just trying to understand your position, I'm no expert :)
Thanks,
Joe

PS- truefaith, lets leave the Calvinism out of it, it's not relevant to this thread

 2009/10/9 20:29Profile
jlosinski
Member



Joined: 2006/9/11
Posts: 294
North Pole, Alaska

 Re:

Orthodox,
No problem :-). thanks for keeping me accountable

 2009/10/9 20:30Profile
Lysa
Member



Joined: 2008/10/25
Posts: 3433
This world is not my home anymore.

 Re: a challenge

A challenge:

What doctrine is required for salvation? Could it possibly be as simple as this...?

Then he said, And he said, "Jesus, remember me when you come in your Kingdom." [b]"I tell you in solemn truth," replied Jesus, "that this very day you shall be with me in Paradise."[/b]
Luke 23.42-43

God bless,


_________________
Lisa

 2009/10/9 20:47Profile
anonymity
Member



Joined: 2009/1/16
Posts: 393


 Re:

Well, I know the main reason why Muslims and other reject things. I just meant there rejection in part is I believe because of this. I think that apologetics and Scriptural reasoning and what not have to do with things as Paul with the Bereans. I believe that thoughts have some role in salvation.

I once talked about this on SI a while ago. It was the first time I talked openly of it in a large emphatic way.

Simply though this is what it boils down to. However, I am not sure my view is all that much different and so I am still debating whether I should make it an issue. Since mutually the view is held of the Godhood of all three ect.

Mainline Christianity teaches that God is 3 persons. That the Holy Spirit, Jesus, and the Father have 3 different and distinct personalities.

I however believe that all 3 share the same personality.

As our word and spirit share the same personality with us so does God.

However Mainline Christianity teaches that God's word and spirit has a separate personality.

Could you imagine if I had 3 personalities? That would seem crazy and indeed it would be. Now I am not laying my whole argument on that but on Scriptures. But, it is in part a reason. For if one said something odd or bad about God one could assume it was not Biblical. Now, one could argue there is mystery or ect and ok, but there is still Scripture to rely on.

So, the Spirit is just God's spirit and God is spirit. Jesus is the Logos or Word of God who took on the form of man and took on the title Son of God. So, God's word and spirit have come forth from the Father to us.

I also do not believe that Jesus was always the Son. I do not even believe He was always Jesus though He was in a foreordained prophetic way. I believe He was eternally the Logos/Word of God, but that He did not become the Son until He took on the form of man by the birthing of God and did not become Jesus until He was given that name from an Angel.

Do you understand what I am saying I believe?

I will say there are 1 or 2 verses I have a hard time with, but stick to the main of passages. Many will claim me a Modalist or something, but I don't believe the same as them nor did I receive it from them but from the Bible alone praying even when I was taught different. I know you cant base things on my experiences but you can on Scripture.

Some other passages would be in Hebrews wherein it is said that Jesus is the express image of His person speaking of the Father or other. I hope you understand as I think what I am saying is pretty simple.

1. no separate personalities. imagine we had 3 personalities. but separate functions as word and spirit with the same personality. as we have one personality with our word and spirit

2. no eternal Sonship but eternal as Logos. there are no scriptures saying that the Sonship was eternal but came when he was born as a Son.

3. no modalism, lack of scriptural understanding, false subjectiveness, teaching from mans influence, ect.

 2009/10/9 20:51Profile
anonymity
Member



Joined: 2009/1/16
Posts: 393


 Re:

Yes, Lysa, I think it is that simple.

It is great that not only is our salvation paid for by such grace but the way to receive that grace is by such grace.

I think that maybe that thief may not have even know the doctrine of the cross as a sacrifice but he believed Jesus and that was enough.

As those in times past knew not the Gospel but believed God it was accounted to them for righteousness.

But, had they heard the Gospel they would have believed it for they believed. And, had they time to study they would have sought the truth and found it.

A few have mentioned this and I have been very blessed by it. That believing on Jesus is all that is needed like the thief or the keeper of the prison. And not just believing a doctrine of a person but simply believing the person relationally and personally. Though of course there will be fruits to varying degrees to seek out truth and find it and that they would have believed the doctrines had they heard them.

 2009/10/9 20:57Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Anonymity,

I wish to help you out here, because frankly, the issue of the Trinity is something I struggled on greatly in my early Christian walk. Indeed, in my early Christian days, I had been all over the board doctrinally. I was greatly confused over some things, and every new argument I heard caused me to chase after a lot of different things. God in His grace helped see me through it all. It wasn't actually until I was almost through Bible college that I finally came to understand the truth of the doctrine of the Trinity. Most of the time, I was a modalist in my thought, until I believe God really opened my eyes.

Quote:

Mainline Christianity teaches that God is 3 persons. That the Holy Spirit, Jesus, and the Father have 3 different and distinct personalities.



This is not quite right. As a Trinitarian, I believe that there is one God who co-exists in three separate persons. They are distinct in number and individuality. They aren't merely personalities, like God is wearing three masks, but separate individuals.

Quote:

I however believe that all 3 share the same personality.



If I understand what you are saying, I think you are in the right area, but I wouldn't personally commit to this language. All three are distinct from one another in their person, but they all share the same "substance." That is, in their individual person, they share the same "God stuff."

Quote:

However Mainline Christianity teaches that God's word and spirit has a separate personality.



This isn't multiple personality disorder. In reality, "modalism" actually teaches God has MPD. That is, God is sometimes the Father, sometimes the Son, sometimes the Holy Spirit. Modalism teaches that He's never all three at the same time. Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all separate masks God wears from time to time, depending on context. This is contrary to the Trinitarian view, which says there is one God who co-exists, co-eternally in three distinct persons, who all share the same nature.

Quote:

Now, one could argue there is mystery or ect and ok, but there is still Scripture to rely on.



There is no doubt a degree of mystery to it. But it's not something that we can't comprehend. It simply can be challenging to grasp, because frankly, God is the only triune being. There is nothing else in all of creation by which we can compare the Trinity to. I know many clever and well meaning people have attempted to do so over the years through well meaning illustrations, but as of to date, there is not one analogy that I have ever seen or anything that can compare to the Triune nature of God. And because of that, these concepts can be very difficult to grasp.

Quote:

I also do not believe that Jesus was always the Son.



"The Word became flesh, and dwelled amongst us," John says. The doctrine of the Trinity states that God has always existed in the persons of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit in Divinity from all eternity. "There was a time when the Word was not" would be the error of Arianism. However, only 2,000 years ago did the incarnation happen, where the Word became flesh. The human nature of Jesus did not exist until the incarnation. However, from eternity past, we believe the second person of the Trinity, the Word/Logos, always existed, alongside of, yet distinct from the Father and the Spirit.

Quote:

2. no eternal Sonship but eternal as Logos. there are no scriptures saying that the Sonship was eternal but came when he was born as a Son.



The doctrine of the Trinity teaches that the Son is "eternally begotten." For the Word of God, "proceeds" from the Father, and has done so from all eternity. The relationship of the Father to the Son to the Holy Spirit has always existed this way. Thus, the second person of the Trinity is called the "the only begotten God" (John 1:18) Additionally, 1 John 4:9 says "God sent His only begotten Son into the world..." That is to say, He was the "only begotten Son" from all eternity, before He was sent into this world by means of the incarnation.

I think you are closer to being Trinitarian than you realize, and in my opinion, it seems you are simply stumbling over the often difficult and technical language of the Trinity. I often did this myself, as these things can be very hard to grasp. This subject can also be hard to understand because of the historic use of the language used to describe this important doctrine, and that language is tied to major debates that resulted in the creation of many creeds.

My "aha" moment, when the light bulb finally came on in my understanding of the Trinity, only came once I spent a considerable amount of time immersed in the study of church history and systematic theology. The word "person" was always very difficult for me to get around, until I worked through how highly technical individuals like Tertullian used this latin-based word. If you have not studied such, I would highly recommend you do. God might not speak to you through that sort of thing, but He did for me.

God bless.

*edited by removing/rephrasing a statement or two after the fact*


_________________
Jimmy H

 2009/10/9 21:45Profile
anonymity
Member



Joined: 2009/1/16
Posts: 393


 Re:

Jim,

thanks for your concern..

You don't have to teach me what Trinitarian doctrine is I was brought up in it for years.

On another note I also have studied for years in depth on these topics.

Not that I cannot be taught or need to learn more or am not open to reason.

I also believe God "showed" me and therefore we may not get far on that basis, but on Scripture of course.

I do agree that I am close to a Trinitarian view, but I also know there are some differences. If you do not know I do "not" hold a Modalistic view to get those types of things out of the way.

I don't think we need to talk about this at length since it is pretty short and simple.

I do plan on doing even more study on the Triunity so thank you for your thoughts on resources.

1.
I know that the mainline view is that God is 3 persons but one as God. I however believe that God is one person with 3 functions as one God.

I do not believe that God has 3 different personalities. If I had 3 personalities even if they agreed I would be odd.

I believe God has 3 functions. As we are with our word and spirit so is God. Our word and spirit function separately, but do not have 3 personalities that have different names. In fact word/Logos and Spirit are not names but titles. As calling our word or spirit word or spirit and it not being a name so with God. Furthermore God is spirit so His spirit is Him.

I think the Trinitarian view in 3 different personalities is false, hurtful evangelistically especially among Muslims, odd in imaging God, unscriptural, unreasonable. There are many other reasons like Christ is the express image of His person ect, but I have aforementioned the main things.

So, I hope you understand what I am saying and why. That I do not believe God has 3 personalities but one yet 3 functioning parts (yet not apart) of Himself and therein I having a differing view.

2.
I do believe that the Logos/Word of God has always existed. I do not believe He has always existed as Son or as Jesus. I do not see any evidence that the Son always existed nor that He was eternally begotten. He may have been eternally spoken forth as the Word of God, but not eternally the Son. He may have had a similarity to a Son as God dearly loves Himself, yet the official title and embodiment was not given until he took on the form of man and it was said of him that He was begotten and that His name "shall" be Jesus the Son of God (though in a way before the foundation of the earth ect He was). Again, I see no evidence of "eternal" begotteness but as it says "today" I have begotten repeatedly. I believe this is a passed down creed from an institution that was falsified namely through Rome and the Protestants that needs to be ridden of and the true doctrine recovered from Scripture and the Apostles.

 2009/10/9 22:08Profile
jlosinski
Member



Joined: 2006/9/11
Posts: 294
North Pole, Alaska

 Re:

Ok, I think I see where you are coming from. Thanks for the clarification, I suppose that it is a good starting point. So God has three different functions that can operate at the same time, but they are of the same personality?

Personhood in relationship denotes roles, such as father to child, husband to wife, employer to employee, ect... Concerning the Trinity, they have three different roles, they are of the same essense, yet distinct in their workings. This is evident in the New testament where Jesus refers to the Father as greater than Him in John 14:28. In the same chapter, He speaks of the Comforter being sent by the Father in Jesus name.

Concerning the eternal sonship of Christ, I can't help but think of the prophetic verse in Isaiah 9:6
For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is [i]given[/i] (my emphasis). I know that there are other verses that speak to this distinction, but I will provide a link that I looked up that you may find helpful.
http://www.gotquestions.org/eternal-Sonship.html

So to me what it seems is that you deny the differences in the persons of the Godhead, but don't deny the unity of the Godhead or the deity of Christ and the Holy Ghost. As far as I know I don't know if you are actually denying the Trinity persay, but rather the personhood of it? I'm trying to keep it straight
:-D

In Christ,
Joe

 2009/10/9 22:14Profile
jlosinski
Member



Joined: 2006/9/11
Posts: 294
North Pole, Alaska

 Re:

Sorry,
I was working on my previous post when you posted your response to Jim below, if my response is redundant, please disregard.
Joe

 2009/10/9 22:16Profile





©2002-2021 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy