Can One Be Christian and Not Believe In The Trinity?

[JustMe]

The echo of Genesis 1:26 in verse 15 does indeed harken back to the Creation narrative:

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.

To each his own. I will stick and align to the message and narrative of Paul and his context rather that grasping for straws as a sign of desperation to force or make Yeshua preexist by comparing it with his Father's work in Genesis 1:1 etc. You do as many others, a disservice to Paul's message regarding the church and its organization. You might try reading further into his message that reveals mor of what I've written.

(Col 1:15) who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

(Col 1:16) For in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things have been created on account of him and for him.

(Col 1:17) And he is superior to all things, and in him all things consist.

(Col 1:18) And he is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; so that in all things he might have the pre-eminence.

(Col 1:19) For it was the good pleasure of the Father that in him should all the fullness dwell,

(Col 1:20) and through him to reconcile all things to Himself, having made peace through the blood of his cross- yes, to reconcile all things through him, whether things upon the earth, or things in the heavens.

The Context of Paul’s Preaching

(Col 1:21) And you, being in time past alienated and enemies in your mind in your evil works,

(Col 1:22) yet now has he reconciled in the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and without blemish and unreproveable before him.

(Col 1:23) If indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to all creation under heaven. Of which I Paul was made a servant,

(Col 1:24) who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church.

(Col 1:25) Of which I was made a servant, according to the plan of God which was given me concerning you, to fulfil the word of God,

(Col 1:26) the mystery of which has been hid for ages and generations; but now has it been manifested to His saints,

(Col 1:27) to whom God was pleased to make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles- which is Christ in you, the hope of glory.

(Col 1:28) We proclaim him, encouraging every man and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may present every man complete in Christ.

(Col 1:29) For this purpose I labour, striving according to his power, which works in me mightily.

 

[Lambano]

Arius,,,,just like the JWs, believed Jesus was a created being...

Puh-leeze. Per Arius's quote to Alexander (see Wikipedia article), Arius believed the Son was begotten, not created, just like it says in the Nicene Creed. There's a subtle difference.

Anything other than the understanding of the Trinity is not orthodox christianity.

And yet, the teachings of Arius were shared by some of the Early Church Fathers.

Justin Martyr wrote The Word is numerically distinct from the Father (Dial., cxxviii, cxxix; cf. lvi, lxii). He was born of the very substance of the Father, not that this substance was divided, but He proceeds from it as one fire does from another at which it is lit....His Divinity, however, seems subordinate, as does the worship which is rendered to Him (I Apol., vi; cf. lxi) .... The Father engendered Him by a free and voluntary act (Dial., lxi, c, cxxvii, cxxviii; cf. Teder, op. cit., 104), at the beginning of all His works. Hmm. Here's an online copy of Dialogue with Trypho. We can both look up what Justin wrote directly.

Tertullian also believed that There was a time when there was no Son and no sin, when God was neither Father nor Judge.

Origen, like Arius, both agreed on the subordination of the Son to the Father.

Apparently, the subordinationist view was shared by many of the ECFs: ... virtually all orthodox theologians prior to the Arian controversy in the latter half of the fourth century were subordinationists to some extent, which also applies to Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Justin Martyr and Novatian.

So, Christian orthodoxy might not have always been what we were told it is.

 

[Lambano]

To each his own. I will stick and align to the message and narrative of Paul and his context rather that grasping for straws as a sign of desperation to force or make Yeshua preexist by comparing it with his Father's work in Genesis 1:1 etc.

So, speaking of Paul and time, when did Christ Jesus exist in the form of God?

... Christ Jesus, who, as He existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (literally, "seized"). - Philippians 2:5b-6.

 

[Armour of God]

Yes, I know you consider yourself to be a Christian. But it is not the private self-assessment that is being discussed here...

I find it very wrong that people try to shame others into believing something they don't understand by labelling them "non-Christians". I don't like it. This shaming method is extremely hostile and un-Christ like and only makes me even more skeptical.

"You must believe or else your not a Christian".
Like really. Iv seen those shaming tactics before in religion, science and society and they won't work on me. Only understanding will work with me, not shaming, that's wrong

God bless

 

[Lambano]

The important point is understanding that being the firstborn of 'pas' or 'all' creation is limited to the new creation established by the Son of God at his resurrection and ascension after Pentecost, for the new believers, the Body of Christ or the infant church.

Well, that is a unique interpretive matrix. Had Paul said "NEW creation", like in 2 Corinthians 5:17 or Galatians 5:17, the case would have been much stronger.

 

[Lambano]

How can I believe something that I don't understand?

I don't understand quantum physics, but I do believe that it does correctly describe and predict certain natural phenomena.

 

[HealthyShape]

I find it very wrong that people try to shame others into believing something they don't understand by labelling them "non-Christians". I don't like it. This shaming method is extremely hostile and un-Christ like and only makes me even more skeptical.

"You must believe or else your not a Christian".
Like really. Iv seen those shaming tactics before in religion, science and society and they won't work on me. Only understanding will work with me, not shaming, that's wrong

God bless

I do not know if you pretend that you do not understand the topic or if your emotions hinder you from understanding the topic. The topic is the rules of this board. The label "Christian" here means a mainstream Christian who does not reject Trinitarian creeds.

Yes, you must believe or else you are not a Christian. That is how it works. This is not a surprising concept in Christianity or in religion.

It is as much shaming as saying you need to have a child to be a mother.

 

[Armour of God]

I do not know if you pretend that you do not understand the topic or if your emotions restrict you from understanding the topic. The topic are the rules of this board. The label "Christian" here means a mainstream Christian who does not reject Trinitarian creeds.

Yes, you must believe or else you are not a Christian. That is how it works.

It is as much shaming as saying you need to have a child to be a mother.

Shaming tactics are a terrible way of teaching something.
Here are some examples

"If you don't support LGBT ideology than your a homophobe"
"If you don't believe in climate change that your a climate denier"
"If you don't support critical race theory than your a racist"
"If you don't take the vaccine then your an anti vaxxer"
"If you don't believe this or that then your a conspiracy theorist"
"If you don't support diversity, inclusion and equality than your a bigot"
"If you don't support muslim immigration than you an islamaphobe"

These shaming tactics don't work on me, they only prove that something is actually wrong. The more you shame the more skeptical I become my friend

 

[Lambano]

Yes, you must believe or else you are not a Christian. That is how it works.

How about if he confessed the Apostle's Creed, which dates back to the second century and predates Nicaea. Would you accept him as a brother in Christ?

I believe in God the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth; And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born from the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried, descended into hell, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty, thence He will come to judge the living and the dead; I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the remission of sins, the resurrection of the body, and eternal life. Amen.

 

[HealthyShape]

How about if he confessed the Apostle's Creed, which dates back to the second century and predates Nicaea. Would you accept him as a brother in Christ?

I believe in God the Father almighty, creator of heaven and earth; And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born from the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead and buried, descended into hell, on the third day rose again from the dead, ascended to heaven, sits at the right hand of God the Father almighty, thence He will come to judge the living and the dead; I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the remission of sins, the resurrection of the body, and eternal life. Amen.

It is not about me.

 

[HealthyShape]

Shaming tactics are a terrible way of teaching something.
Here are some examples

"If you don't support LGBT ideology than your a homophobe"
"If you don't believe in climate change that your a climate denier"
"If you don't support critical race theory than your a racist"
"If you don't take the vaccine then your an anti vaxxer"
"If you don't believe this or that then your a conspiracy theorist"
"If you don't support diversity, inclusion and equality than your a bigot"
"If you don't support muslim immigration than you an islamaphobe"

These shaming tactics don't work on me, they only prove that something is actually wrong. The more you shame the more skeptical I become my friend

This is a straw man fallacy. Christianity means something, it is not an empty envelope.

And I have no idea why you switched to playing a victim. You said yourself - "call me a theist". And now you are doing this.

 

[Lambano]

It is not about me.

Just answer the question, please.

 

[Armour of God]

This is a straw man fallacy. Christianity means something, it is not an empty envelope.

And I have no idea why you switched to playing a victim. You said yourself - "call me a theist". And now you are doing this.

So what. I said i don't care