G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Scripture verse Post 3? The rest is idle talk. Do you have scripture to support “YOUR” belief?
By your own interpretation, so what, we shouldn’t use the Bible? So what are you saying?
- Status
By your own interpretation, so what, we shouldn’t use the Bible? So what are you saying?
C
confusedius
Guest
Look, I am a guest here- I am not Catholic. I am here for answers, not trading our favorite scriptures to prove our point. I refuse to debate your faith or the Catholic Church. I have too much respect for both.
I feel no more reason to confirm my belief than to ask you to do likewise. I generally use the NIV version of the Bible, although I am well versed in the KJV. Although I use the Bible for my belief, my God-given ability to reason compels me to use that gift when necessary.
I don’t attack people who seem to disagree with me. But permit me to quietly question your assertion that all the Bishops were at the NC, for I believe you are wrong. And I also stand by my comment on the rather tardy date of the NC.
James
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
This is the CAF forum. And when you state a belief contrary to what we as Catholics/Christians believe who uphold the better of the 8-Councils, which you are most definately entitled to. Then you should also be prepared to support you beliefs.
Nothing “is” simply because one states it is. What "is’ the issue is providing documented Biblical proof to support your claims.
No-one is attacking you, I am quietly and respectfully “questioning” your beliefs. And why you believe, what you believe. I believe what I believe, because it is supported by Bible and 2000-years of scholars in Doctrine, and my education.
My friend this is what we do here. Our beliefs are not wrong simply because you said so. When you present an opposite side of a debate, you should be ready to defend yours.
Now if this is simply “opinion” based on nothing than state so and we shall graduate this and move on.
I’m not sure what you thought actually went on here. Especially in this area of the forum. But our beliefs are ridiculed daily, all day. So yes, we would like to “understand” why others believe what they believe.
C
CMatt25
Guest
It doesn’t matter whose interpretation. Whether mine. Or yours that the Catholic Church interprets Herself and everything correctly. Or anyone else’s. When the truth is we are talking faith and belief. And that is all I was saying. I said nothing about we couldn’t use the Bible. We just need I think to sometimes remember while doing it, that we are talking about faith and beliefs. God bless you and each of us on our journeys in faith. Peace.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Yes but this is of course the non Catholic section of CAF where persons of various faiths can come to discuss our various beliefs and learn about different faith beliefs from each other. Hopefully in a rather charitable manner, without too much defensiveness and animosity.This is the CAF forum. And when you state a belief contrary to what we as Catholics/Christians believe who uphold the better of the 8-Councils, which you are most definately entitled to. Then you should also be prepared to support you beliefs.
Nothing “is” simply because one states it is. What "is’ the issue is providing documented Biblical proof to support your claims.
No-one is attacking you, I am quietly and respectfully “questioning” your beliefs. And why you believe, what you believe. I believe what I believe, because it is supported by Bible and 2000-years of scholars in Doctrine, and my education.
My friend this is what we do here. Our beliefs are not wrong simply because you said so. When you present an opposite side of a debate, you should be ready to defend yours.
Now if this is simply “opinion” based on nothing than state so and we shall graduate this and move on.
I’m not sure what you thought actually went on here. Especially in this area of the forum. But our beliefs are ridiculed daily, all day. So yes, we would like to “understand” why others believe what they believe.
The Apologetics section on the other hand for instance (Underneath it, it says Defense of the Faith, doctrines & dogma, historical controversies) probably is a great place to defend only Catholicism if one is inclined. But anyway I thought the poster you are referring to, did explain he/she uses the NIV or KJV mostly in arriving at his/her beliefs along with God given reasoning.
E
Esdra
Guest
Just wondering (and a bit off-topic here).
Which “Christian” Churches don’t believe in the Trinity? As you say the list’d be shorter?
Jehovah’s wittnesses, SDA (?), LDS, Uniterian Churches, Oneness Churches.
Any other?
— QUAKERS and SHAKERS?!
(just read that here.)
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
I’m not sure, I only know when one mentions they don’t believe God is Christ. Then my own curiousity is peaked and I try to understand how this thinking is arrived at?Just wondering (and a bit off-topic here).
Which “Christian” Churches don’t believe in the Trinity? As you say the list’d be shorter?
Jehovah’s wittnesses, SDA (?), LDS, Uniterian Churches, Oneness Churches.
Any other?
— QUAKERS and SHAKERS?!
Not a big issue, I find it facinating, and often feel maybe someone has come along to drop some new profound wisdom on me.
R
RyanBlack
Guest
Before you label the Assyrian Church of the East as heretical adherents of Nestorianism, you might check out the “Common Christological Declaration between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East.”
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_11111994_assyrian-church_en.html
D
dzheremi
Guest
I’m not under Rome, Ryan. Nestorius was a heretic, and those who do not recognize him as such are followers of heretical teaching. Heresy is heresy, no matter its antiquity.
G
GaryTaylor
Guest
Ryan. I almost commented on that. But with respect to dzheremi and not being well versed I passed. But I was under the impression they attended the 1st Council.
P
panner
Guest
I say no. There is time to learn, the essential is too understand that Christ died to save us, that’s mhoSome say yes. Some say no. Is a correct understanding of the Trinity essential for salvation or not? Do those who have a different teaching of the Trinity worship a different Jesus? I’m sure most of y’all know what I already believe on this. All views welcome. Lets dig in! Peace
R
RyanBlack
Guest
Fine. I disagree, and those under the authority of Rome should be aware of the “Common Christological Declaration” before they label the Assyrian Church of the East as heretical. Also, the Catholic Church has reached similar Christological understandings with the Oriental Orthodox. I do not believe the Assyrian Church of the East to be heretical, and I do not believe the Oriental Orthodox Church to be heretical I also am very doubtful as to whether Nestorius himself was actually a Nestorian. While I accept the Christological teachings of the Council of Ephesus, I am very suspicious about the manner in which it was conducted, and in particular, the conduct of St. Cyril of Alexandria. I believe that had he and Theodoret (more of a theologican and better at articulating Antiochene christology than Nestorius) been more willing to listen to each other, they might have seen each other’s teachings as complementary, rather than as incompatible.
J
jmcrae
Guest
As long as we don’t actively deny the teaching, and as long as we submit to the teaching to the best of our understanding (however poor our understanding may be) we don’t have to be able to articulate it clearly.Some say yes. Some say no. Is a correct understanding of the Trinity essential for salvation or not? Do those who have a different teaching of the Trinity worship a different Jesus? Im sure most of yall know what I already believe on this. All views welcome. Lets dig in! Peace
But we do need to be open to the Church’s teaching, and not actively promoting anything that is contrary to the Church’s teaching.
For example, a baby who has just been baptized has no comprehension whatsoever of the Trinity, but he will certainly go to Heaven if he dies before ever reaching the age of understanding.
But someone who understands the doctrine, and rejects it, would likely not go to Heaven, if he died before repenting.
C
CMatt25
Guest
In your belief “likely” being the key there. In mine I don’t presume to know who is likely not to go to heaven. I’m glad Christ gave me Matt 7:1 for instance so I can leave who is likely not to go to heaven to the judgement of Him.
D
dzheremi
Guest
From Suha Rassam Christianity in Iraq (Gracewing Pub., Gloucester, 2005):
“Reports from this Council (the Council of Nicea)…show that there were two bishop representatives from Mesopotamia as well as from other Eastern churches.”
(The stuff that follows is more to Bryan or others who would defend the CotE)
They were not represented at the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD at which Nestorius was condemned. While the CotE had adopted the canons and creed of Nicea at their own Synod of Isaac in 410 AD (the first East Syrian council), by 424 AD at the Synod of Dadisho the Church within the Persian Empire declared itself free of Western influence, partly as a way to deflect accusations of Byzantine sympathies that had led to much persecution at the end of the reign of Yazdgird I (when Bishop Dadisho was imprisoned as a Roman sympathizer, for instance). This declaration also freed them up to pursue their own theology without interference from other churches that they had previously been in communion with. It wasn’t until 486 AD at the Synod convened by Akakios in capital Seleucia-Ctesiphon that the CotE produced their own profession of faith (and if you want to know all about that, I suggest you buy Dr. Rassam’s book; it is quite good), but the point is that by the time of the Council of Ephesus when Nestorius was condemned, they’d already placed themselves outside of the sphere of influence that might have brought them back to orthodoxy, so their affirmation of the Nicene Creed is a little…I don’t know the word…irrelevant, with regard to their supposed orthodoxy or acceptability?
I don’t see anything in the linked Vatican document that causes me to radically reevaluate any of this history. With due respect to the Vatican and those under its leadership, I must say that there seems to be very little in it that touches on any of this at all, and that (as per usual) it affirms very basic things but lacks the depth of understanding necessary to establish the “deep spiritual communion” hoped for in its message. I obviously have nothing against the Assyrians at all (see my signature), but that doesn’t mean I’ll overlook their error. I believe Nestorius was and is (in so far as the Assyrians continue today to uphold his teaching as orthodox, so his teaching still lives) in error by his refusal to adopt an orthodox understanding of the nature of Christ. This is where we can come full circle with regard to the thread topic and say that a proper understanding of Christ, which entails a proper understanding of the Trinity (and vice-versa), is necessarily sought (I’m emphasizing that because, like Hesychios, I don’t think we actually can understand this mystery) as part of seeking salvation.
J
jmcrae
Guest
To deliberately reject the teaching of the Church is the same thing as to reject Christ.
I am sure you understand what the consequence is, of rejecting Christ - and it is just as “likely” as the result of being killed, if one jumps from a very high place, without using any kind of safety gear, or ensuring something soft to land on - miracles do take place, and people have survived such drops from high places - but not very often.
P
Planty_Pall
Guest
He benidict.Some say yes. Some say no. Is a correct understanding of the Trinity essential for salvation or not? Do those who have a different teaching of the Trinity worship a different Jesus? Im sure most of yall know what I already believe on this. All views welcome. Lets dig in! Peace
I don’t know your position. I don’t necessarily believe that we Catholics have yet nailed down every jot and tittle that has been revealed regarding the Blessed Trinity. I think Moses, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had defective views of the Trinity. I think the ante-Nicene Fathers had defective views of the Blessed Trinity. I think perhaps, Catholics saved by God’s grace in our own day have defective views of the Blessed Trinity. In short, I believe that one can partake in the divine nature, with the theological virtues of faith, hope, and charity, while having a mistaken understanding of the Blessed Trinity.
On the other hand, I don’t have much hope for recalcitrant heretics who are obstinate for no good reason in their own private opinions.
Plantagenet
P
PJM
Guest
My friend, may I respectfully suggest that you may not be asking the question correctly?=benidict;7578075]Some say yes. Some say no. Is a correct understanding of the Trinity essential for salvation or not? Do those who have a different teaching of the Trinity worship a different Jesus? Im sure most of yall know what I already believe on this. All views welcome. Lets dig in! Peace
In That God is a TRINITY it is necesary to make this essential clairification.** WHY **Because Salvation Flows Through Jesus Christ, via the Holy Spirit; as directed by God the Father.
Matt. 3: 13-17 "Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to John, to be baptized by him. John would have prevented him, saying, “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?” But Jesus answered him, “Let it be so now; for thus it is fitting for us to fulfil all righteousness.” Then he consented. And when Jesus** 2nd. Person of the Trinity]** was baptized he went up immediately from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting on him; **The Holy Spirit: 3td. person of the Trinity] **[17] and lo, a voice from heaven, saying, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.” [1st. person of the Trinity]
Because God is ONLY “ONE”, but three different and distinct Persons, that share the SAME [ONE] Divine Nature; salvation is always and everytime by the ENTIRE GODHEAD; [Trinity], and cannot be attributed to any single person of the Trinty. Each has a ROLE to play in our salvation; and YES; beleif in God is a necessary element in the normal process of Salvation.
God Bless,
Pat
C
CMatt25
Guest
If by “the Church” and as a faithful and devout Catholic you mean the Catholic Church, then I understand where you are coming from. Peace.To deliberately reject the teaching of the Church is the same thing as to reject Christ.
I am sure you understand what the consequence is, of rejecting Christ - and it is just as “likely” as the result of being killed, if one jumps from a very high place, without using any kind of safety gear, or ensuring something soft to land on - miracles do take place, and people have survived such drops from high places - but not very often.
H
Heliotropium
Guest
All Christians are called to be theologians regardless of their vocation. If you don’t know your faith how do you practice it or teach it to others?
Now as to the OP’s question; is the understanding of the Trinity needed for Salvation? Well as one of our Orthodox brethren put it no one can really full comprehend the Trinity but to add to this we are required to understand it based on what has been revealed to us through divine revelation by way of The Catholic Church and Sacred Scripture. The Trinity is the most important doctrine of the Christian Faith! It is what makes us Christian. Can one be a Christian if they do not believe that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit are Three Persons in One God? Is someone a Christian if they believe The Father is God, The Holy Spirit is God, but that Christ is was just a man? No, they could not be Christian.
Yet does God condemn people for Ignorance? No! If someone truly didn’t know any better and lived a life to the best of their ability, following to the best of their ability Gods will then no they will not be damned because they are part of the Church by desire. However if someone is willfully ignorant then the answer is yes. Willful ignorance can come from knowing the truth and denying it, or from not genuinely searching for the truth or having faith in it.
- Status