Do you have to believe that Jesus is the 2nd Person to be saved?

[lbaker]

DHK,

When you say Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity do you mean it as something like "Jesus is the second Person listed in the Trinity"?

Or does "2nd Person" indicate Jesus is lesser in rank than the Father, but higher in rank than the Spirit? Does the numbering system reflect importance, or sequence of coming to be, or what? I am trying to understand why it is so important to assign Jesus a number in your opinion.

If all you mean is that He is the 2nd Person named in a particular scripture, I don't think anyone would argue with that.

What exactly does being the "2nd Person" mean, as compared to being the 1st or 3rd Person?

thanks,

Les

 

[annsni]

A person is saved by faith, not knowlege. You had said that we believe that Jesus is part of the Godhead, whether we understand it or not. Knowing God is not an event, it's a process. It's been my experience that those who come to know God do so after committing their lives to Him, not before. Believing does not necessarily require knowlege, it only requires faith.

How can you have faith in what you don't know?

 

[Thinkingstuff]

let me ask it this way. Can you be saved and not believe Jesus is God? In the same way can you be saved and not believe Jesus was man just as he was God and had the ability to die for our sins? The trinity is so fundamental to our faith that if you believe anything apart from it you are not saved. Its like saying the bible isn't the word of God or that Jesus did not die for my sins. Thats not to say you have to understand the intricacies of it but a general knowledge and acceptance of it.

 

[Matt Black]

By default your position is and consistently has been that a person can have a different view of Christ such as the J.W.'s and Mormons and still be saved.
That is heresy.

Absolutely. Agree with you totally.

 

[DHK]

DHK,

When you say Jesus is the 2nd Person of the Trinity do you mean it as something like "Jesus is the second Person listed in the Trinity"?

Or does "2nd Person" indicate Jesus is lesser in rank than the Father, but higher in rank than the Spirit? Does the numbering system reflect importance, or sequence of coming to be, or what? I am trying to understand why it is so important to assign Jesus a number in your opinion.

If all you mean is that He is the 2nd Person named in a particular scripture, I don't think anyone would argue with that.

What exactly does being the "2nd Person" mean, as compared to being the 1st or 3rd Person?

thanks,

Les

There is order in the trinity. In every household the father is the head of the household, and it has been that way (traditionally and scripturally) for years. The Father is the first person simply by name, which also means by rank--though they are still co-equal, co-eternal, co-existent.
The Father-Son relationship has been consistently used throughout the Bbile. Jesus said: "I come to do the will of my Father." When that moment of time came, as he bore the sins of the world, God the Father (as it were) turned his back on God the Son, as he cried out "My God, My God, Why hast thou forsaken me." The Second person of the trinity (God the Son) manifest in the flesh bore the sins of the world.

They are different in rank, different in position, different in purpose, but the same God.

See the picture again at Jesus baptism:

Matthew 3:16-17 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

1. God the Father's approval--a voice from heaven.
2. God the Son in the flesh being baptized.
3. God the Holy Spirit lighting on him as a dove.

What did they see and hear. They could see and hear three actual persons or physical representations of God, and yet there is only one God. There are three persons in one God. It is obvious that God the Father is first. All fathers are first. It is obvious that the Son is second. God sent his son. That leaves the Holy Spirit in third position, the position that the Mat.28:19 and 1John 5:7 gives it. It also makes logical sense for Jesus said that he would send the Comforter after he would depart for them.

The story of Anannias and Sappharia demonstrate the deity of the Holy Spirit as well as his "personality."
Peter said: You have lied to God, and you have lied to the Holy Spirit--both being the same person. You can't lie to a force. You lie to a person. That person was the third person of the triune Godhead. His function is very much different than the functions assigned to Jesus and the Father.

Three persons--one God. Do I understand it all? No. But I accept the teachings of Scripture by faith, for that is what the Bible teaches.

 

[Matt Black]

But if someone commits his/her life to Christ before having an understanding of Jesus' trinitarian nature, or of scripture, or of a lot of spiritual disciplines that most of us are aware of, that person is saved.

The reason I say this is because a lot of people come to the Lord before they know much about him. It's only after coming to the Lord that they start learning about the Word. Those people are not unsaved.

Muslims believe in Jesus. They don't believe He is God however. Are they saved?

 

[Johnv]

Muslims believe in Jesus. They don't believe He is God however. Are they saved?

We're not talking about simply believing. We're talking about commiting your life to Christ. My assertion is that, if someone commits his/her life to Christ before having an understanding of Jesus' trinitarian nature, or of scripture, or of a lot of spiritual disciplines that most of us are aware of, that person is still saved. This is because a lot of people come to the Lord before they know much about him. It's only after coming to the Lord that they start learning about the Word. Those people are not unsaved.

How can you have faith in what you don't know?

Having faith does not require knowlege. If that were the case, then a good majority of people who commit their lives to Christ are categorically lost.

 

[lbaker]

Matthew 3:16-17 And Jesus(1), when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit (2) of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice (3) from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

In the above passage you quoted we have Jesus named 1st, the Spirit 2nd, and the Father 3rd.

 

[lbaker]

Muslims believe in Jesus. They don't believe He is God however. Are they saved?

I don't think anyone here is arguing that Jesus isn't God.

 

[Matt Black]

I think that to commit your life to Jesus then you need to know Who Jesus is. Committing your life to Him is a massive step and not to be taken lightly. It is impossible to understand what you are doing then unless you know Who He is, at least in outline. You must know, for example, that He is God and was not just a man, that He died on the cross for our sins, and that He rose again. Nothing about salvation makes any real sense unless those facts about Him are known and believed ie: there is no salvation in committing your life to just a holy man, just one of God's many prophets, or to someone who only appeared to die or who died and didn't rise again; indeed, I would question the point of attempting to commit your life to such an individual. Therefore I think that those who do commit their lives specifically to Jesus (as opposed to 'God' generally), do have some correct understanding of Who Jesus is.

 

[Matt Black]

I don't think anyone here is arguing that Jesus isn't God.

No, but the premise of the OP is that it is possible to be saved without believing Jesus is God, hence my reference to Muslims (I might as easily, as DHK has done, refer to JWs, Mormons etc)

 

[Johnv]

...the premise of the OP is that it is possible to be saved without believing Jesus is God...

No, the premise of the OP is that it is possible to be saved before having any knowlege of the trinity at the time you make a commitment to Christ.

 

[Matt Black]

Same difference in my book as far as the nature of Christ is concerned...

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The Churches used to train people what the faith was before they accepted them into the body. Whatever happened to that? Oh wait Catachesis is a bad word.

 

[Matt Black]

It comes down to the age-old question posed by the Man Himself: "Who do you say that I am?"

[ETA - Thinkingstuff, the Church of England's Alpha course, which is a form of catechesis and which has led to many thousands being saved over here, explicitly deals with "Who was Jesus?" in Session #1]

 

[Johnv]

Same difference in my book as far as the nature of Christ is concerned...

There's a huge difference in not having an understanding of the trinity and rejecting it. I have very little understanding of nuclear physics. But I accept its important in my life.

To say you cannot be saved unless you have knowlege of the Trinity is like saying you cannot accept nuclear physics unless have knowlege of it.

 

[DHK]

Matthew 3:16-17 And Jesus(1), when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit (2) of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: And lo a voice (3) from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

In the above passage you quoted we have Jesus named 1st, the Spirit 2nd, and the Father 3rd.

That is a ridiculous argument.
Matthew is not recording the order of anything but the chronological order of the events of the baptism of Jesus.

God gave us a picture of the Father.
God gave us a picture of the Son.
God gave us a picture of the Holy Spirit.

The three persons are there, physically, and yet they are three in one God.

It was detailing the events of God the Son's baptism.

 

[Matt Black]

I don't think the analogy quite stacks up, there, Johnv

 

[Thinkingstuff]

There's a huge difference in not having an understanding of the trinity and rejecting it. I have very little understanding of nuclear physics. But I accept its important in my life.

To say you cannot be saved unless you have knowlege of the Trinity is like saying you cannot accept nuclear physics unless have knowlege of it.

The problem with you analysis here is that you understand that the universe is made up of atoms which can be split. You don't have to understand how the bonds work for a nuclear reaction to take place but you have the fundamental knowledge that it has something to do with atoms. The trinity is like that. You don't have to know the details but have a basic belief that Jesus is God, the Father is God, and the Holy Spirit is God but there is only one God. Thats simple enough and not detailed in any way but suffiecient to know that we're speaking of the same Christ.

 

[lbaker]

Actually, I think the premise that is being challenged is that in order to be saved you have to believe and understand that the three Persons of the Godhead, or Trinity, are assigned certain numeric values and you have to believe these numbers are assigned as follows - The Father -1, The Son, Jesus - 2, Holy Spirit - 3.

Just believing that Jesus is God, or that there are three Persons in the Godhead or Trinity, Father, Son, and Spirit, is not enough. You have to believe they are assigned numbers and know what the numbers are.