Is Christ God?

[Eleanor]

Well, we all get it wrong to some degree. I believe that one must believe Christ is God to be saved. I don't know of another of His characteristics that is essential. Of course, one can say: "Well, what attributes of God are essential for salvation" if they want to dig deeper.

What saves is faith in and trust on the the person (Eph 2:8-9) and atoning work of Jesus Christ (Ro 3:25) for the remission of one's sin at the Final Judgment.

 

[fastfredy0]

So I don't know exactly what you are asking.

A part of Saving Faith is something to be believed. Below is a list of truths from which to chose. Which item(s) on the list would nullify Saving Faith should one not believe it to be true? (This is in the context of the thread which asks is one can be saved without believing Christ is God.)

Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Fastfredy0 is cool.

 

[fastfredy0]

What saves is faith in and trust on the the person (Eph 2:8-9) and atoning work of Jesus Christ (Ro 3:25) for the remission of one's sin at the Final Judgment.

Agreed, but faith requires something to be believed and I am asking if the belief that Christ is God is needed for salvation? In other words, if one doesn't believe Christ is God is the consequence HELL?
If you want to dig deeper you can list other things that if not believed would be a sure sign the person is HELL bound.

For example, are any of the following essential for salvation:
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Fastfredy0 is cool.

 

[fastfredy0]

To be honest I believe saving faith is a gift given to a person...once they receive this saving faith the understanding of the...
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Second coming.........come via the Holy Spirit as one matures in the faith and moves from milk to meat.

I agree with the concept that "faith is a gift given to a person".
I'll ask the question another way. What item(s) on your list, if not believed to be true, is a sign that one has NOT been given the gift of faith?

 

[Binyawmene]

What saves is faith in and trust on the the person (Eph 2:8-9) and atoning work of Jesus Christ (Ro 3:25) for the remission of one's sin at the Final Judgment.

Yes, when a person is regenerated and have received faith, then a person will believe that: "Jesus is the Christ" (1 John 5:1) and "Jesus is Lord" (Romans 10:9).

 

[Arial]

A part of Saving Faith is something to be believed. Below is a list of truths from which to chose. Which item(s) on the list would nullify Saving Faith should one not believe it to be true? (This is in the context of the thread which asks is one can be saved without believing Christ is God.)

Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Fastfredy0 is cool.

One could not believe that FastFredyO is cool and still be saved. (I happen to believe he is, though, and that does not nullify my salvation.) Denying any of the others would mean no salvation. IMO. If any are denied (not the same thing as not yet knowing or understanding) then it is not the Christ who is God and second person of the Trinity, was born of a virgin, was without sin, died on the cross and was raised from the dead that the denier is placing their trust in. Therefore, no salvation. That is the Christ who one must believe and have faith in.

 

[fastfredy0]

One could not believe that FastFredyO is cool and still be saved.

What !!! *giggle*

I happen to believe he is, though, and that does not nullify my salvation.

LOL


Re:
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.

If any [see above] are denied (not the same thing as not yet knowing or understanding) then it is not the Christ who is God and second person of the Trinity, was born of a virgin, was without sin, died on the cross and was raised from the dead that the denier is placing their trust in. Therefore, no salvation.

Interesting. I don't agree save for agreement to "divinity of Christ" being necessary for salvation. Are there other facts that you feel one must acknowledge is true if one is to be saved? Example: That Christ rose on the third day or Christ's mother was Mary or ....

Thanks for responding.

 

[Tambora]

Hosea 13:4 ESV
But I am the Lord your God
from the land of Egypt;
you know no God but me,
and besides me there is no savior.

Titus 2:13
waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,

 

[CrowCross]

I agree with the concept that "faith is a gift given to a person".
I'll ask the question another way. What item(s) on your list, if not believed to be true, is a sign that one has NOT been given the gift of faith?

All of them.

 

[Josheb]

If one has not called upon the Name of the Lord, then they are not saved.

And there are no atheists in foxholes. People who are not saved call upon the Lord every day.... and never get saved. They've used the Lord's name in vain, not as an appeal for salvation from sin. They're not interested in submission, or acknowledging their depraved state or their need for salvation from an inevitable end.

The text cited was not written to them.

The one who can and does call upon the LORD salvifically believes He exists and rewards those who earnestly seek Him.

So it is about unregenerate non-believers. In fact, the context teaches about those who go about establishing their own righteousness and not submitting themselves unto the righteousness of God (Romans 10:3). Thus, they are unregenerate non-believers.

I disagree. Everything Paul wrote in that chapter is couched in the context he explicitly established in the previous chapter: Not everyone who is a descendant of Abraham is a descendant of Abraham, not all of Israel is Israel, and it is the children of promise, not the flesh in whom God's word does not fail. To think God's word failed in the lives of those who were fleshly descendants of Abraham, those of the Israel that is not Israel is to necessarily compromise God's omni-attributes. God fails. Paul is not remotely implying God, or His word, can/have/will fail. Paul made this exceedingly clear when he cited Jacob and Esau, explaining the example by saying God's mercy is NOT based on how a person works, or how they will/choose. It is based solely on the will and purpose of God. Strict monergism.

So by the time Paul reaches Romans 10:3 he is talking about apostate people who will NOT be saved. EVER. To be specific to the text, Paul is writing about first century events occurring at the time he wrote that epistle. He is NOT writing about future anything. Well-known, well-stablished theologians screw this up all the time. I just got done reading "Three Views on Israel and the Church," and one of the most remarkable facts about that book is not a single one of those four theologians ever expounded on verse 11:5. It is an egregious lapse. They're all expounding on the future significance of Israel when the text itself explicitly limits itself to "at the present time." Yes, the principles contained in the three-chapter exposition can be generalized, but they must be generalized appropriately, exegetically, rationally, not wantonly or eisegetically. People who try to obtain righteousness by works NEVER come to salvation. EVER. They are all already lost.

But God, at that present time, had preserved a remnant.

It is strictly monergistic.

There's no mention of whether or not God preserved any remnant for the following century, the one after that, this one or the one two millennia from now. It is an abuse of the text to make those three chapters say otherwise.

Those in verse 10:3 is juxtaposed against those in verse 10:6. Works versus faith. Works are deadly, faith is salvific. There is no righteousness in the pursuit of the Law. Paul's mention of those Israelites is the mention of the unsaved-never-saved, not the maybe-they-will-be-saved-maybe-they-won't-be-saved. Paul's not speculating anywhere in those three chapters. Those that pursue righteousness solely by the Law are NOT descendants of Abraham that are his descendants of promise, NOT the Israel that is Israel by faith and promise, NOT the children of promise who God has been saving all along, was saving in the first century, and will continue to save in every subsequent generation until He decides to bring the ages of ages to a close.

And, in conclusion (for now)......

Paul then proceeds to use the Old Testament texts to point out Jesus, and point to Jesus in a manner that would otherwise be completely nonsensical and heretical if Jesus were not, in fact, divine. When Paul says, "Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed," he is implicitly implying those who call on Jesus will not be disappointed. People seeking to obtain righteousness by the Law do not call on Jesus. Those people killed Jesus. They deny his divinity. There is no salvation for anyone denying Jesus' inherent divinity. At best, that belief is a belief that an otherwise ordinary human male can be the salvation of everyone. That is heretical. Similarly, when Paul states, "Whoever calls upon the LORD will be saved," he is, again, exploiting an Old Testament prophecy, newly revealing its inescapable inherent truth: There is no name other than Jesus' by which anyone can (or will ever) be saved. It is the name of the one those who try to obtain righteousness by the Law who put Jesus to death. They were calling upon God in the wholly misguided belief the Law was their means to obtaining righteousness when the truth is that Law testifies about Jesus and his divinity. Children of flesh never inherit anything but wrath from God. The word is NOT within them. They do NOT believe the word that is NOT in them. They believe in a legalism, a legalistic perversion of God's word they invented by fleshly means.

Romans 10 is NOT about that group of people. Romans 10 is about those of Israel that are Israel, the descendants of Abraham that are Abraham's descendants by way of God's promise(s), not flesh (or bloodline, or genetics). God had preserved a remnant..... and the rest of them were going to reap destruction. simply because they were not children of promise and they sowed to their flesh, not the Spirit that never dwelt within them. God's word had gone out into the world but hearing but never understanding. God was going to use non-Israel to make Israel jealous (it's not clear in that verse whether Paul means the Israel that is Israel or the Israel that is not Israel) AND He was going to make them angry by a nation who didn't understand. Those who weren't even seeking Him would find Him. How is that possible unless God also makes (forces) them understand? The juxtaposition is that Israel had been looking, waiting for centuries for the Messiah to come and God was going to make him known to a bunch of people who weren't even looking. It is all prophetic.

It is all also strictly monergistic.

And the repeated use of the Old Testament to make equivalences between the LORD and the Lord necessitate Jesus' divinity. Otherwise, Paul is being heretical, and no one should ever read Paul again.


Psalm 110:1
The LORD says to my lord: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.

Acts 2:29-36
“Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Being therefore a prophet and, knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God and, having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. For David did not ascend into the heavens, but he himself says, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool."' Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”


The house of Israel is not the same as the nation of Israel. The house of Israel existed long before the nation of Israel. Not all Israel is Israel. Those who look to the Law to obtain righteousness will die; they are not the ones who understand Jesus is the word of God that is God made flesh, so the word is not within them. Paul is not writing about that group. He's writing about the remnant of Israel that God had preserved, that would be saved whether they knew it or not, understood it or not, or wanted it or not. Who, after all, wants to be made jealous and angry by ignorant people?

Besides, it usually bad practice to define a larger narrative by just one verse .

 

[Arial]

What !!! *giggle*


LOL


Re:
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.

Interesting. I don't agree save for agreement to "divinity of Christ" being necessary for salvation. Are there other facts that you feel one must acknowledge is true if one is to be saved? Example: That Christ rose on the third day or Christ's mother was Mary or ....

Thanks for responding.

Not that I can think of off hand. As to the Trinity, there is a belief within Christianity known as binitarian. That is, believing in the deity and distinction of "person" with Father and Son, but the Holy Spirit not seen as personal. I do not believe that disqualifies one from salvation simply because Spirit and spirit are such elusive terms.

The others; divinity of Christ, virgin birth, sinless life of Jesus, his death on the cross, and his resurrection, all pertain to who Jesus is and what he did. If any one of those things is denied, it takes away from either his person or his work, and therefore is not the same Jesus we see in the Bible.

There is one thing, now that I think about it as it has come up on the forum, that I am still wrestling with as to whether or not, if not believed, would take away salvation. And that is Christ dying a substitutionary death on the cross for the forgiveness of our sins. To discuss that would move the thread off course, so I will leave it up to you whether to go there or not.

 

[makesends]

Well, we all get it wrong to some degree. I believe that one must believe Christ is God to be saved. I don't know of another of His characteristics that is essential. Of course, one can say: "Well, what attributes of God are essential for salvation" if they want to dig deeper.

Yet even that is never enough. Are we wise enough to hold a valid meaning for 'God', sufficient to make our faith salvific? Faith is not OUR valid [synergistic] entry to induce God to save us.

But I don't hold that no knowledge, no concept, no facts, nothing mentally held, can constitute Gospel. But, as we know, the Gospel is not from us but to us.

 

[makesends]

A part of Saving Faith is something to be believed. Below is a list of truths from which to chose. Which item(s) on the list would nullify Saving Faith should one not believe it to be true? (This is in the context of the thread which asks is one can be saved without believing Christ is God.)

Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Fastfredy0 is cool.

ooooh, that's a tough one!

 

[Eleanor]

Agreed, but faith requires something to be believed and I am asking if the belief that Christ is God is needed for salvation? In other words, if one doesn't believe Christ is God is the consequence HELL?
If you want to dig deeper you can list other things that if not believed would be a sure sign the person is HELL bound.
For example, are any of the following essential for salvation:
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.

Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.
Fastfredy0 is cool.

Still tryin' to find Fastfredy0 in my Concordance. . .

I vote for @Binyawmene's post #25.

 

[Eleanor]

What !!! *giggle*
LOL
Re:
Divinity of Christ.
Trinity.
Virgin birth.
Sinless life.
Death on the cross.
Resurrection.

Interesting. I don't agree save for agreement to "divinity of Christ" being necessary for salvation. Are there other facts that you feel one must acknowledge is true if one is to be saved? Example: That Christ rose on the third day or Christ's mother was Mary or ....

Thanks for responding.

Virgin birth is necessary to divinity, if Jesus is not to be sired by a human father.

 

[fastfredy0]

Yet even that is never enough. Are we wise enough to hold a valid meaning for 'God', sufficient to make our faith salvific?

I'd say "yes". I'd prefer the word "knowledgeable" over "wise". God had given us enough knowledge to satisfy the needed aspect of saving faith. My personal formula is the one believes Christ is God and trusts in Christ for salvation. I also believe if one trusts in one's works then that may nullify saving faith ... not 100% sure on last point.

But I don't hold that no knowledge, no concept, no facts, nothing mentally held, can constitute Gospel. But, as we know, the Gospel is not from us but to us.

Agree

 

[fastfredy0]

Virgin birth is necessary to divinity, if Jesus is not to be sired by a human father.

Well, that is probably true. But the question is: Is belief in the virgin birth necessary for salvation.

Frank and Helen had to "come together" to produce Fastfredy0 and from that aspect this coming together was necessary for my salvation too but we're dealing with the "knowledge content of faith" needed for salvation and not other ancillary items.

 

[makesends]

Virgin birth is necessary to divinity, if Jesus is not to be sired by a human father.

This has always been an interesting notion to me. I'm pretty sure God could have equally sired Jesus by a non-virgin, but I believe he sired Jesus by a virgin as a testimony to silence anyone's claims as to whether it was really by a human father.

 

[makesends]

One could not believe that FastFredyO is cool and still be saved. (I happen to believe he is, though, and that does not nullify my salvation.)

Denying any of the others would mean no salvation. IMO. If any are denied (not the same thing as not yet knowing or understanding) then it is not the Christ who is God and second person of the Trinity, was born of a virgin, was without sin, died on the cross and was raised from the dead that the denier is placing their trust in. Therefore, no salvation. That is the Christ who one must believe and have faith in.

Maybe this discussion could be more productive if consider that "denying a fact", is active intent, which is not the same thing as "failing to intellectually comprehend". Salvific faith has always been the work of God, who is the only one with that intellectual comprehension. Not even the angels are that smart.

It is in Christ we must believe, but WE do that only by the Work of God, and not by our intellectual activity. That we affirm that it is so, however, is a progressive thing. We know our precious Lord Jesus Christ because we are 'in him', but we increase in knowledge of him.

I'm pretty sure we all agree here that we will be pretty surprised at who will 'make it to heaven' and who won't.

 

[Arial]

Maybe this discussion could be more productive if consider that "denying a fact", is active intent, which is not the same thing as "failing to intellectually comprehend". Salvific faith has always been the work of God, who is the only one with that intellectual comprehension. Not even the angels are that smart.

It is in Christ we must believe, but WE do that only by the Work of God, and not by our intellectual activity. That we affirm that it is so, however, is a progressive thing. We know our precious Lord Jesus Christ because we are 'in him', but we increase in knowledge of him.

I'm pretty sure we all agree here that we will be pretty surprised at who will 'make it to heaven' and who won't.

I believe I qualified "denying" in that or a previous post by (not the same thing as not having learned or not understanding.} Actively denying iow. That would involve at least some head knowledge of those things on the list and flat out denying that they are true, in order to have a religion that they call Christian, but that is not, because they deny any of those things.