Can non-Trinitarians be saved?

[hedrick]

Do you not think that the word Trinitarian describes someone with a particular set of beliefs?

Yes, but it's more specific than saying that Jesus is Lord, or that there is one God.

 

[1an]

I have searched but was unable to find any scripture that says one must understand that Jesus is God (God the Son) in order to be saved. All I could find is accepting him as Messiah and following his teachings etc. Understanding that God is three ie:" Father Son and HS is the correct view but it doesn't seem to appear to be required for salvation within those that follow Christ as the Messiah.

From my notes:
First we need to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ who said “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by me." (John 14:6)

Salvation is through Jesus Christ, we are not saved by our own efforts; living a good life will not save us, and we are not saved by doing good works, "For it is by grace that we are saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Before we can be saved we need to ask ourselves what are we being saved from and the answer of course is that we are saved from the consequences of our own sin which means coming to a realization that we are sinners. Many people deny this but the Bible tells us, "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" (Romans 3:23) and goes on to explain, "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" (Romans 5:12) and "If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us." (1 John 1:10)

In order to be forgiven we need to repent of our sins according to Christ’s instruction for He said "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." (Luke 13:5) and we need to believe that Jesus Christ died for us, was buried, and rose from the dead.

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

"God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners. Christ died for us." (Romans 5:8) and “if we confess with our mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in our heart that God hath raised him from the dead, we shall be saved." (Romans 10:9)

Finally, through prayer we need to invite Jesus into our life to live with us and to be our constant guide, companion and personal Saviour.

"For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." (Romans 10:10)

"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." (Romans 10:13)

 

[Der Alte]

Trinitarian beliefs were not really established until the 4th century. (300 years later)

Nonsense! Nothing happened in the 4th century which could be construed as establishing the Trinity.

 

[1an]

Yes, but it's more specific than saying that Jesus is Lord, or that there is one God.

Is it wrong to be specific?

 

[hedrick]

Nonsense! Nothing happened in the 4th century which could be construed as establishing the Trinity.

Nicea made it mandatory.

 

[hedrick]

Is it wrong to be specific?

No. But there have been postings saying that only Trinitarian believe certain things when others did too.

 

[1an]

No. But there have been postings saying that only Trinitarian believe certain things when others did too.

OK. So, many non-Christians, people who have never been to church even, identify as a Christian on census forms etc. If you ask someone what their religion is, they will say they are a Christian because they are not Muslim or Buddhist etc. In reality, they do not have a faith. Jehovah Witnesses say they are Christians, but they say Jesus was only a man. I feel that saying I am a Trinitarian tells people a lot more about me and in addition it separates me from the nominal Christians as well as the cults.
.

 

[Saint Steven]

That is when it was codified.

I would venture to say that the thief was nowhere doctrinally. As is true of most new believers. That's why we have confirmation classes.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Trinitarian beliefs were not really established until the 4th century. (300 years later)

 

[1an]

I would venture to say that the thief was nowhere doctrinally. As is true of most new believers. That's why we have confirmation classes.

Saint Steven said: ↑
Trinitarian beliefs were not really established until the 4th century. (300 years later)

.
And I would venture to say the thief on the cross knew his Saviour. Doctrine and theology matter little, it is what is in the heart that counts. Jesus knew his heart and thoughts, and confirmed the thief was one of His, saying "today you will be with me in Paradise." Praise God for His forgiving mercy.

What might have done it for the thief would be when he saw Jesus hanging there, his body stretched naked with his bones clearly visible, close to death, and then when he looked down and saw they were casting lots for his clothes, exactly as it says in Psalm 22:17-18 “I can count all my bones—they stare and gloat over me; they divide my garments among them, and for my clothing they cast lots,” he would have thought, this is Him, this is the promised Messiah, and then, knowing who Jesus really was, he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” (Luke 23:42) and Jesus replied, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.” (Luke 23:43)

 

[Der Alte]

Nicea made it mandatory.

The Trinity was never discussed at Nicaea. The nature of the son was a major topic.

 

[Der Alte]

... Trinitarian beliefs were not really established until the 4th century. (300 years later)

Prove it! Quote from anything written in the 4th century which established the Trinity.

 

[Francis Drake]

I was a non Trinitarian for a long time before I understood what Jesus did.

But despite that theological gap, as a child, I still heard God speak to me and also had revelations that turned out to be scripturally true. Looking back, I know I was born again at that time.
God even told me that he lived in my heart and not in a church building, also that it was he who had made eternal provision for me, not my own goodness.
That was somewhere between the ages of 11 and 15, and I didn't hear the gospel till a decade later.

Here's what the NT says about salvation.
Acts2v21 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved.’
And again-
Romans10v13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”
There's no theology here, just a heart cry to God.

It couldn't be simpler, Salvation comes from calling on the name of the Lord.
But who is that Lord. In my case without teaching, that Lord was simply the God of creation, just like Paul teaches in Romans1.
Nobody has an excuse for not knowing because the Lord and God of creation is already revealed deep within every man woman and child on the planet.

Romans1v18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
To suppress the truth, man must first know it!

19because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
So God has revealed himself to all mankind, before they ever hear a gospel message. They can cry out to God at any moment, just as I and millions more have done as children.

20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Clearly seen and understood. That's where I was as a child. No theology, just an inner knowing that God was there around me.

21because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Despite that knowledge held by everyone, many reject it and make all sorts of excuses, but nothing will help them when confronted by the Lord at the last judgement.

So who is this Lord we call out to? For me, Jesus didn't enter the story because I had never heard it other than the usual simpering Christmas and Easter nonsense. In my mind, I was dealing with God, an undefinable God with no details, and I was definitely no Trinitarian!

Thankfully, God clearly knew who He was and obviously knew who I was and answered me when I cried out!

So to answer those who are besotted with the right theology, no I didn't pray the sinner's prayer.
No, I didn't at that time know or believe Jesus had died for me.

But the fact remains that he did die for me, and it was because of that death that my salvation was possible. But even after I heard the gospel and committed my life to the Lord, I still didn't really understand why he had to die, nor did I understand the Trinity till several years had passed.

And back to those two verses in Romans and Acts about calling on the name of the Lord, they are actually quotes taken from the OT.-
Joel2v32 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls.
And in the original Hebrew, it says Yahweh. ie. Whoever calls on the name of Yahweh.

But as we see from John1, Jesus is that creator God of Genesis that the patriarchs worshipped.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
And-
v8But as many as received Him, (The Word of God who was from the beginning) to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
So anyone receiving the creator God, automatically becomes born again.

 

[hedrick]

The Trinity was never discussed at Nicaea. The nature of the son was a major topic.

The subject at Nicea was the relationship between the Father and the Son, and the eternality of the Son. That's 2/3 of the Trinity. To my knowledge, the Spirit wasn't an issue in the Trinity.

I have maintained in other contexts that the language of Nicea was broader than the final formulation of the Trinity. Homoousias could be, and was, understood differently by moderates on both sides, which made it work as a compromise. But still, Nicea gave us Father and Son that were in some respects distinct but equally God. It took a while to agree on three persons and one essense, but I think Nicea decided on the basic structure.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I was a non Trinitarian for a long time before I understood what Jesus did.

But despite that theological gap, as a child, I still heard God speak to me and also had revelations that turned out to be scripturally true. Looking back, I know I was born again at that time.
God even told me that he lived in my heart and not in a church building, also that it was he who had made eternal provision for me, not my own goodness.
That was somewhere between the ages of 11 and 15, and I didn't hear the gospel till a decade later.

Here's what the NT says about salvation.
Acts2v21 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved.’
And again-
Romans10v13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”
There's no theology here, just a heart cry to God.

It couldn't be simpler, Salvation comes from calling on the name of the Lord.
But who is that Lord. In my case without teaching, that Lord was simply the God of creation, just like Paul teaches in Romans1.
Nobody has an excuse for not knowing because the Lord and God of creation is already revealed deep within every man woman and child on the planet.

Romans1v18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
To suppress the truth, man must first know it!

19because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
So God has revealed himself to all mankind, before they ever hear a gospel message. They can cry out to God at any moment, just as I and millions more have done as children.

20For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Clearly seen and understood. That's where I was as a child. No theology, just an inner knowing that God was there around me.

21because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Despite that knowledge held by everyone, many reject it and make all sorts of excuses, but nothing will help them when confronted by the Lord at the last judgement.

So who is this Lord we call out to? For me, Jesus didn't enter the story because I had never heard it other than the usual simpering Christmas and Easter nonsense. In my mind, I was dealing with God, an undefinable God with no details, and I was definitely no Trinitarian!

Thankfully, God clearly knew who He was and obviously knew who I was and answered me when I cried out!

So to answer those who are besotted with the right theology, no I didn't pray the sinner's prayer.
No, I didn't at that time know or believe Jesus had died for me.

But the fact remains that he did die for me, and it was because of that death that my salvation was possible. But even after I heard the gospel and committed my life to the Lord, I still didn't really understand why he had to die, nor did I understand the Trinity till several years had passed.

And back to those two verses in Romans and Acts about calling on the name of the Lord, they are actually quotes taken from the OT.-
Joel2v32 And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD Shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be deliverance, As the LORD has said, Among the remnant whom the LORD calls.
And in the original Hebrew, it says Yahweh. ie. Whoever calls on the name of Yahweh.

But as we see from John1, Jesus is that creator God of Genesis that the patriarchs worshipped.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
And-
v8But as many as received Him, (The Word of God who was from the beginning) to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 13who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
So anyone receiving the creator God, automatically becomes born again.

There is John 8.24: "...if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”

 

[Saint Steven]

And I would venture to say the thief on the cross knew his Saviour. Doctrine and theology matter little, it is what is in the heart that counts.

You are arguing both sides of the issue. Earlier you indicted that he had to be Trinitarian. (a doctrinal/theological position)

 

[Francis Drake]

There is John 8.24: "...if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”

The word "He" is not in the Greek original, but has been added and completely alters the meaning.
John8v24Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am (He), you will die in your sins.”

The "I am" is a reference to the God of Creation (Who of course was Jesus anyway, although even the disciples hadn't recognised it yet).

But here's what Jesus says about having the correct theology.
Matt12v31“Therefore I say to you, any sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven people, but blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32“Whoever speaks a word against the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in the age to come.
According to Jesus himself, speaking against the son of man (Jesus) is forgivable. This of course covers all sorts of theological mistakes, such as not understanding his person or his sacrifice.

Speaking against the Holy Spirit however is very different. That's because it's the Holy Spirit that convicts our human spirit, as Romans1 reveals. Rejecting the convicting power of the Holy Spirit is rejecting newness of life. That person by choice will remain in his sins.

As I said in my post, I came to the Lord as a child, with absolutely no knowledge of who and what Jesus did.
Matt18v2Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3and said, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.
In the above passage, Jesus states that entry to the Kingdom just needs the humility of a child, whereas you and countless theologians insist it needs the theology of an adult mind.
I would rather listen to him than you.

Finally, it is a biblical fact that the unregenerate cannot possibly understand what Jesus did on the cross, not until after they have become born again. The theology of the cross cannot therefore be the door to new birth.
You and most evangelists have got it all back to front.

Put aside all that you have been taught and read the following slowly.-
1Cor1v18For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

I think most would agree that the phrase, "those who are perishing" refers to the unregenerate, the unbelievers?
Most would also agree that the phrase, "us who are being saved", refers to those who are born again, the sons of God?

Unless you think otherwise about these two phrases, the Paul makes it clear that the message of the cross is reserved entirely for those who are already born again sons of God!
The message of the cross cannot be understood by spiritually dead people!

 

[Oberamagau]

Nonsense! Nothing happened in the 4th century which could be construed as establishing the Trinity.

The council of Nicaea is where the Bishops of Rome made Jesus God. I'm not sure how many times they voted on the trinity prior to that but in the 325AD Nicaean vote the trinity doctrine finally passed by a very narrow margin of votes.

It wasn't until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.

 

[Saint Steven]

Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.

Now we can do that on an online forum. Real progress. - lol

 

[Der Alte]

The council of Nicaea is where the Bishops of Rome made Jesus God. I'm not sure how many times they voted on the trinity prior to that but in the 325AD Nicaean vote the trinity doctrine finally passed by a very narrow margin of votes.
It wasn't until 451, at the Council of Chalcedon that, with the approval of the Pope, the Nicene/Constantinople Creed was set as authoritative. Debate on the matter was no longer tolerated; to speak out against the Trinity was now considered blasphemy, and such earned stiff sentences that ranged from mutilation to death. Christians now turned on Christians, maiming and slaughtering thousands because of a difference of opinion.

Nonsense. At Nicaea the bishop of Rome had no more authority than any other bishop. There were 300+ bishops from all over the empire voting. The Trinity was never mentioned at Nicaea. The council issued 20 canons on different topics none of them mention the Trinity.
The council at Chalcedon issued 40 canons. The Trinity is never mentioned. None of the canons mention the Nicene Constantinople creed.
You might try reading some real church history..

 

[Oberamagau]

Amazing...

First page of Google -

The Council of Nicea and the Doctrine of the Trinity ...
The Council of Nicea and the Doctrine of the Trinity

A common criticism by those who reject the doctrine of the Trinity is that the doctrine was not part of the early church, nor a conscious teaching of Jesus Himself, but was imposed on the church by the Emperor Constantine in the early fourth century at the Council of Nicea.

The Council of Nicea, The Trinity - Timeline Index
The Council of Nicea, The Trinity - Timeline Index
The Council of Nicea convened on May 20, 325 A.D. The 230 church leaders were there to consider a question vital to the church: Was Jesus Christ equal to God the Father or was he something else? Athanasius, only in his twenties, came to the council t...

First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia
First Council of Nicaea - Wikipedia
The First Council of Nicaea (/ n aɪ ˈ s iː ə /; Greek: Νίκαια) was a council of Christian bishops convened in the Bithynian city of Nicaea (now İznik, Turkey) by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325. This ecumenical council was the first effort to attain consensus in the church through an assembly representing all of Christendom.

What occurred at the Council of Nicea? | GotQuestions.org
What occurred at the Council of Nicea? | GotQuestions.org
Question: "What occurred at the Council of Nicea?" Answer: The Council of Nicea took place in AD 325 by order of the Roman Emperor Caesar Flavius Constantine. Nicea was located in Asia Minor, east of Constantinople. At the Council of Nicea, Emperor Constantine presided over a group of church bishops and other leaders with the purpose of defining the nature of God for all of Christianity and ...

Council of Nicaea concludes - HISTORY
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/council-of-nicaea-concludes

Meeting at Nicaea in present-day Turkey, the council established the equality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in the Holy Trinity and asserted that only the Son became incarnate as ...

First Council of Nicaea | Description, History ...
First Council of Nicaea | Description, History, Significance, & Facts
First Council of Nicaea, the first ecumenical council of the Christian church, which took place in 325 in the ancient city of Nicaea (now Iznik, Turkey). The council condemned Arius and the Arian heresy that Christ is a created being and revised the creed to clarify the equality of God the Father and God the Son.
Trinity - Wikipedia

Trinity - Wikipedia
The Confession of the First Council of Nicaea, the Nicene Creed, said little about the Holy Spirit. At the First Council of Nicea (325) all attention was focused on the relationship between the Father and the Son, without making any similar statement about the Holy Spirit: ... The Holy Trinity : In Scripture, History, Theology, and Worship.

The Truth about the Council of Nicaea - YouTube

What happened at the council of Nicaea? Was the Trinity made up there? Was the divinity of Jesus declared there for the first time? This video answers these question? Sources:
The Doctrine of the Trinity at Nicaea and Chalcedon ...
The Doctrine of the Trinity at Nicaea and Chalcedon | Stand to Reason

The Council of Nicaea defined the Biblical doctrine for the Trinity by focusing on the identity of Jesus, but it was not within the scope of the council to define Jesus' humanity and the relation of the two natures to each other. The Trinitarian doctrine had significant implications for Christology that was addressed at Chalcedon in 451 A.D.

The Council of Nicea - Christian History for Everyman
The Council of Nicea
The former adopted Arianism and was rightly censured by the Council of Nicea. The latter was in high regard among contemporaries, but he is occasionally accused of Arianism by later churchmen and historians who do not understand the Nicene and Ante-Nicene view of the Trinity.