Are Trinitarians Saved?

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Ask a trinitarian if you can be saved without being a trinitarian.

Anyone remember when I posted to Jason that John MacArthur and Paul Washer wouldn't buy what he is peddling here? Or that his embracing of Trinitarians as saved wouldn't be returned by John MacArthur and Paul Washer?
Jason Badejo obviously doesn't know what these guys believe concerning the Oneness Apostolic movement. But he doesn't care, because he is a shapeshifter, and wants to live in both worlds.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason B

I can. He doesn't preach the gospel. I've never vouched for Joel Osteen, that's what happens when people believe EBs garbage. In fact I'd agree with this man, whom EB says is a rebrobate and a devil....is this the preaching of a devil?


https://youtu.be/DRjGuAp-ic4

Well, Jay Bird, your boy Washer has another video where he said that he heard Joel Olsteen's preaching and it spoke to him. Bro, Paul Washer is a blind guide who doesn't believe in speaking in tongues, or the baptism in Jesus name. He believes that you cannot deny the Trinity, and by the way, Paul Washer calls it a Trinity. Paul Washer is double minded, and in your video which you posted to us. Paul Washer said that Joel Olsteen was God's judgement upon the people who hear his preaching. But you applaud that? Years later your boy would flip flop and then say that Joel Olsteen preached conviction to him? You have a pastor? Do you attend a church that believe the garbage you believe? Yes, garbage, because it will change as you grow up.

[Originalist]

Well, I'll let you guys concentrate on saving the world without me for a few days. I have a 15 page term paper due the 12th of April ,and that is just the beginning of sorrows. So, so-long for a few days. I pray all had a wonderful celebration of the Lord's resurrection today. Grace and peace be multiplied to all of you through God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Anyone remember when I posted to Jason that John MacArthur and Paul Washer wouldn't buy what he is peddling here? Or that his embracing of Trinitarians as saved wouldn't be returned by John MacArthur and Paul Washer?
Jason obviously doesn't know what these guys believe concerning the Oneness Apostolic movement. But he doesn't care, because he is a shapeshifter, and wants to live in both worlds.

I am aware of what they believe, yet they are both fallible human beings. I won't stand at the judgment seat of John MacArthur, but if Christ. I don't worship Washer or MacArthur, I simply do not believe they are "devil's". I do believe they are born again brethren.

As for their views on oneness and the trinity, you are misrepresenting MacArthur to a degree (but not totally). For them the issue is the deity of Christ. They think that if someone denies the trinity they don't believe in the deity of Christ. To them to deny the trinity is to deny Christ.

Yet this comes mostly from 1)the fact that essentially anyone who denies the trinity DOES deny the deity of Christ, so it's hard for them to fathom oneness Christology that denies the trinity so to speak, but yet affirms the absolute deity of Christ.
2) Because oneness theology is lesser known, there are a lot of misunderstandings out there. The most common is it is sequential modalism. Another is that it denies the real humanity of the Son, another is that oneness denies the Father (somewhat based on the supposed Sabellianism if OPs).
3)To a degree there is not a real desire to rightly understand Oneness on the part of trinitarians. There is an element of authority. Trinitarianism is the dominant view, and church history suggests that when a view becomes dominant we don't make room for another. It was true when Monarchiasm was dominant, Arianism, Nestorianism, etc. It is safe to assume that Oneness theology would be the same. Everyone wants to be right. Truth is important, but pride and power are blights the church has had for 2,000 years. And the number of oneness orgs and splits suggests we are just the same. So you can't base God's judgment on opinions of men.
4)Oneness people make no greater effort to rightly understand trinitarianism that trinitarianism do for Oneness. OPs claim trinitarianism worship 3 gods and are pagans.
5) MacArthur says in the clip understanding the trinity is not necessary to salvation. He does say explicit denial would mean damnation, but explains it's because to him to deny the trinity is to deny that Jesus is God. Again, they don't connect the dots that you can disagree that God is three persons, yet wholly affirm the absolute humanity and deity of Christ.
6)Just because a trinitarian says a mean thing doesn't mean we have to respond the same way, which is exactly what gas happened since 1916. The AiG trins kicked out the Oneness people and they've been condemning each other since. Howbeit Oneness people didn't have a problem with trinitarians until they got kicked out if AG?
Furthermore, unfortunately, Christians anathemaizing each other over secondary issues sadly has a long history. Just because someone says something mean doesn't mean we have to react likewise.
7)what Trinitarians and oneness believe is closer than any other two groups in the world. We don't affirm 3 persons, but we do affirm God is triune, though we don't use that word. We agree that God is triune in that we affirm God exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We also affirm that God exists as such eternally and simultaneously (not in sequence). This when trins say "aha the baptism of Jesus" it reveals their complete misunderstanding of oneness. And when Oneness people who affirm that the prayers of Jesus are real prayers, and there is a real distiction between Father and Son accuse trinitarians of worshipping 3 gods, we are very close to doing the very thing we charge them with. Yes there are nuances, and different theories. Essentially all of which come from how we understand, interpret, and speculate about exactly how God became man in the incarnation.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Well, Jay Bird, your boy Washer has another video where he said that he heard Joel Olsteen's preaching and it spoke to him.

Wow you are something else. Does honesty mean anything to you? Seriously? Everything you say is twisted. It's kind of pathetic.

So I found the video, of which I was unaware. But in it Washer notes that basically everything Osteen said was "out of context and wrong" that the message was materialistic. "He was wrong about what was important, totally wrong". He simply said it made him think about being more positive (because he dies have quite a bit of stern preaching, and can be misunderstood). That said, even if Washer totally flipped and went Osteen, who cares? I don't follow Paul Washer. Men fall all the time. They backslide, apostasize, turn out to be hypocrites and false brethren. If you follow men, you will be disappointed. I simply believe Washer is a brother, not a devil. His walk with God though has minimal effect or influence on my own. So I don't know why you focus so much on him.

Now then though, here is the supposed bomb shell clip:

https://youtu.be/87RQUQgvhB4

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Bro, Paul Washer is a blind guide who doesn't believe in speaking in tongues, or the baptism in Jesus name. He believes that you cannot deny the Trinity, and by the way, Paul Washer calls it a Trinity. Paul Washer is double minded, and in your video which you posted to us. Paul Washer said that Joel Olsteen was God's judgement upon the people who hear his preaching. But you applaud that? Years later your boy would flip flop and then say that Joel Olsteen preached conviction to him?

See above comments and video.

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You have a pastor? Do you attend a church that believe the garbage you believe? Yes, garbage, because it will change as you grow up.

I attend a Bible Church, you know this.
Your garage comment is simply juvenile, it bears no further response.
And I've been a Christian 18 years, and I'm nearly 40 so whatever "when I grow up"is supposed to mean, I'll leave to you. I'm sure you can think of something nasty to say about it.

[Jason B]

Just putting this out there for readers who may want more than hear say or a snippet clip. EB, you too

https://youtu.be/Oul-9fbp1Ak

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Jason B

Your answers are so disappointing. Not because you don't agree,I already expect the Steve Winter like schtick from you, but because you absolutely refuse to even deal with any semblance of what someone actually says or believes.

I believe in "nothing". I believe that "every Tom, Dick, and Harry are saved". I believe heaven is just a debate forum. I believe Joel Osteen is going to heaven. And about a thousand other things I've not only not said, but never even came close to saying.

I honestly don't know what integrity means to you.

Are your arguments really so poor that you can't accurately state what an opposing view says? Are your beliefs so inconsistent that you simply can not deal with anything of substance? Are you so insecure in your self that you must project a persona on others, so that you can feel good about yourself by never having to face the facts?

Would you be mad at God if someone you don't think deserves to be in heaven is there?

Your constant deflection suggests you would. You are acting like that wicked servant who had a great debt he couldn't pay and was shown amazing Grace and forgiveness by God, only to find someone who seeks the same, and you violently grab them by the throat and demand they appease you and your standard in order to be forgiven.

Will you be mad at God if trinitarians are in heaven? Will you complain because God is good, like those who worked in the heat of the day? Isn't God free to do as He will with what is His?

You are like the religious zealots who brought the woman caught in adultery to Jesus, not caring nothing for the person, only wanting their view of Justice served. The had chapter, book, and verse.

You forget that blessed are the poor (in spirit) who come to God as beggars, realizing we have nothing to offer, nothing to give, nothing to add to God's perfection, and deserving nothing but wrath.

Do you hate grace?

Is the real gospel offensive to you?

Bump

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Jason B

I am aware of what they believe, yet they are both fallible human beings. I won't stand at the judgment seat of John MacArthur, but if Christ. I don't worship Washer or MacArthur, I simply do not believe they are "devil's". I do believe they are born again brethren.

Do they believe you are born again? See, most Calvinists tend to think Pentecostals are not born again.

As for their views on oneness and the trinity, you are misrepresenting MacArthur to a degree (but not totally). For them the issue is the deity of Christ. They think that if someone denies the trinity they don't believe in the deity of Christ. To them to deny the trinity is to deny Christ.

EVERY classical trinitarian who knows his doctrine would affirm that to deny the trinity is to deny Christ, for (so they reason) Christ is the second person of the trinity, and a non-trinitarian view of God presents a false (non trinitarian) view of Jesus. "The deity of Christ" to many trinitarians essentially means the belief that Christ is "God the Son, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity". While others of course think that "if you say you don't believe in the trinity, then you must not believe Jesus is God!" THOSE people don't know Oneness, Arianism, or any of the theological issues surrounding theology proper and the trinitarian controversy. To suggest MacArthur doesn't understand those issues is, to me, quite a stretch. If he doesn't, then he's way behind the curve on basic theological and historical knowledge. Practically every trinitarian theologian has interacted with the "godhead controversies" in their education, and to suggest MacArthur simply doesn't know that Oneness believers believe Jesus is God is too much for me to believe. If it's true, well, what does say about his credibility as a teacher of anything?

Yet this comes mostly from 1)the fact that essentially anyone who denies the trinity DOES deny the deity of Christ, so it's hard for them to fathom oneness Christology that denies the trinity so to speak, but yet affirms the absolute deity of Christ.

"Essentially everyone"? Dude, are you serious? I can't believe you said that. I think you've been reading too many trinitarian books.

2) Because oneness theology is lesser known, there are a lot of misunderstandings out there.

Trinitarian polemics against Oneness are generally rife with red herrings and straw man arguments, like the supposed sequential modalism or denial of Christ's humanity. That's due to the fact that some trinitarians intentionally misrepresent Oneness, and then most other trinitarians don't even bother finding out for themselves, they just parrot the ones who've gone before. In other words, the ignorance is self imposed and entirely blameworthy.

3)To a degree there is not a real desire to rightly understand Oneness on the part of trinitarians. There is an element of authority. ... Truth is important, but pride and power are blights the church has had for 2,000 years. And the number of oneness orgs and splits suggests we are just the same.

Most of the Oneness organisational splits are due to other issues besides issues in theology proper. So the splits are not due in any way shape or form to "oneness theology" but rather to human nature and the nature and purpose of man made organisations.

4)Oneness people make no greater effort to rightly understand trinitarianism that trinitarianism do for Oneness.

This is patently untrue. I would say a large number, if not the majority, of Oneness people are former trinitarians. At least here in the West. Furthermore, the vast majority of Oneness apologists I have encountered, MYSELF INCLUDED, are VERY familiar with trinitarian theology, creeds, affirmations, confessions, catechisms, the Fathers, etc etc etc. In fact, I would venture to say that most Oneness apologists know trinitarian theology better than most non-catholic trinitarian apologists.

The charge of tritheism is a long standing and valid charge (it was noticed by Tertullian himself). The pagan origin of triadic theology is well attested and documented. If one adheres to a theology born in paganism, one is (wait for it...) a pagan.

5) MacArthur says in the clip understanding the trinity is not necessary to salvation. He does say explicit denial would mean damnation, but explains it's because to him to deny the trinity is to deny that Jesus is God. Again, they don't connect the dots that you can disagree that God is three persons, yet wholly affirm the absolute humanity and deity of Christ.

This just shows that MacArthur is a theological boob who doesn't know what he's talking about. The Athanasian Creed explicitly says to acknowledge the Triunity of the Godhead is necessary to be saved:

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled; without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one; the Glory equal, the Majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is; such is the Son; and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreated; the Son uncreated; and the Holy Ghost uncreated. The Father unlimited; the Son unlimited; and the Holy Ghost unlimited. The Father eternal; the Son eternal; and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals; but one eternal. As also there are not three uncreated; nor three infinites, but one uncreated; and one infinite. So likewise the Father is Almighty; the Son Almighty; and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties; but one Almighty. So the Father is God; the Son is God; and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods; but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord; the Son Lord; and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords; but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity; to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord; So are we forbidden by the catholic religion; to say, There are three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created; but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten; but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is before, or after another; none is greater, or less than another. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal. So that in all things, as aforesaid; the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved, let him thus think of the Trinity.

And again:

Early Protestants inherited the late medieval devotion to the Athanasian Creed, and it was considered to be authoritative in many Protestant churches. The statements of Protestant belief (confessional documents) of various Reformers commend the Athanasian Creed to their followers, including the Augsburg Confession, the Formula of Concord, the Second Helvetic Confession, the Belgic Confession, the Bohemian Confession and the Thirty-nine Articles.[18] A metric version titled "Quicumque vult", with a musical setting, was published in The Whole Booke of Psalmes printed by John Day in 1562. Among modern Lutheran and Reformed churches adherence to the Athanasian Creed is prescribed by the earlier confessional documents, but the creed does not receive much attention outside of occasional use – especially on Trinity Sunday.

(Both from the Wikipedia entry)

6)... 1916. The AiG trins kicked out the Oneness people and they've been condemning each other since. Howbeit Oneness people didn't have a problem with trinitarians until they got kicked out if AG?

The Oneness members of the AoG were hoping the trinitarians would get on board with jettisoning man made traditions like trinitarianism, but the trinitarians would have none of that so made it practically impossible for Oneness believers to remain. The AoG trinitarians did not just "kick the Oneness people out", rather they ratified belief in the trinity, making the Oneness believers unable to remain and still hold to their consciences. Thus, we see the "early AoG Oneness people" most certainly DID have a problem with trinitarianism.

Furthermore, unfortunately, Christians anathemaizing each other over secondary issues sadly has a long history. Just because someone says something mean doesn't mean we have to react likewise.

"Secondary issues"? What is a "secondary issue"? How in the world is the nature and person of God, the answer to the question of WHO IS GOD a "secondary issue"?????

7)what Trinitarians and oneness believe is closer than any other two groups in the world. We don't affirm 3 persons, but we do affirm God is triune, though we don't use that word. We agree that God is triune in that we affirm God exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. We also affirm that God exists as such eternally and simultaneously (not in sequence).

This strikes me as a very confused way of trying to explain Oneness.

This when trins say "aha the baptism of Jesus" it reveals their complete misunderstanding of oneness. And when Oneness people who affirm that the prayers of Jesus are real prayers, and there is a real distiction between Father and Son accuse trinitarians of worshipping 3 gods, we are very close to doing the very thing we charge them with.

Not so. When trinitarians claim the baptism of Jesus proves the trinity, it is not because they misunderstand Oneness, but because they are grasping at a straw in denial of their own theological presuppositions (such as God's omnipresence and incorporeality) in order to pretend they have us in an "Gotcha!" moment. And when we accuse trinitarians of worshipping three gods, it is most certainly NOT because we misunderstand trinitarianism. It is precisely because we DO understand trinitarianism that we make the accusation. We understand that trinitarianism is a mutually exclusive pair of contradictions, and that the claim to "monotheism" is purely for the sake of hiding the polytheism inherent in the doctrine from the masses, lest they be repulsed at it and reject it.

Yes there are nuances, and different theories. Essentially all of which come from how we understand, interpret, and speculate about exactly how God became man in the incarnation.

There is a box, inside whose lines we get to colour. We can colour all we want inside the lines, but colouring OUTSIDE the lines is verboten. That box is the BIBLE. And yes, there are certain lines. The Bible makes certain, definite statements that we must accept. It is not for us to throw up our hands and say "all is personal interpretation" in order to sweep away all differences and have big tent religion. Certain things are non negotiable.

[Aquila]

John MacArthur contends that speaking in tongues is a demonic deception. That's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

John MacArthur contends that speaking in tongues is a demonic deception. That's blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Not really. He's not saying demons are speaking through people. Rather, as a cessationist, that Satan deceives people into believing they ae speaking in tongues when they are only actually babbling. JM has not said a word against the Holy Spirit. He simply denies a certain gift of the Spirit is for today. That is ignorance, not blasphemy.