ECT The Gospel Proper

[Clete]

To argue that someone could be regenerated (born anew) without acknowledging Our Lord's divinity is to grant a pass to the Arian.

This argument ignores the plain fact that it is God that grants faith. A person's faith is upon an object, the Person, Jesus Christ, one Person with fully divine and human natures. How exactly could God's house be so divided such that the Father grants faith of a man or woman who has set the object of their faith upon a mere man? The Arian worships an idol of their own making. In effect God would be granting faith to an idolater of an object, a mere man, incapable of propitiating the wrath of God for sin. May it never be.

No one is arguing that a new believer's faith fully envelops Christological doctrines. Some may never come to a more wholesome understanding of exactly who Jesus Christ is. But all who a truly born anew will acknowledge Jesus Christ as God who came in the flesh.

AMR

As I mentioned to someone else already, I do not believe that someone could reject the divinity of Christ and be a Christian but being ignorant of a fact is not the same as rejecting it. There are certain facts that one must understand and believe in order to become saved. The deity of Christ is without any question an absolutely true biblical fact that I do not dispute in the slightest. I'm just not convinced that it happens to be one of the facts that one must accept in order to take that first step into a saving faith in Jesus Christ.

If I'm wrong, prove me wrong. You and I are about as far apart doctrinally as we can be and both still be Christians and so bear in mind that none of your doctrine is going to convince me. You'll have to restrict yourself to entirely biblical arguments.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[JudgeRightly]

'almost no resemblance'

A raven and a black pickup truck have "almost no resemblance" between them but have at least "some resemblance" to each other (they're both black).

Doesn't make them the same thing though.

One's an animal, the other is a machine.

Comparing the Mormon God and the Mormon Jesus to the God and Jesus of the Bible are like trying to compare a raven with a black pickup truck. They may be the same color, but there really is no way to compare them.

 

[glorydaz]

Of course! As I said, I completely agree that Jesus is the Creator God (Romans 1) and that His divinity is part of what qualifies Him to be a sacrifice for the sins of the world and that the whole thing falls apart if Jesus is a mere man. I understand and fully agree with all of that. What I question is whether this particular truth is one of those that a person must understand and believe in order to get saved. Is this aspect of biblical truth one that an evangelist must go ever with a potential convert in their discussions about the gospel and getting saved? Is this particular truth a prerequisite for salvation or can the understanding of it come after?

It seems to me that it could come after. You seem to think otherwise. I'm open to being convinced that you're right.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I would think the obvious way to test this out would be to ask those who know full well they are saved, what it was they believed from the first. I had heard Jesus died for our sins over and over again, including bits and pieces here and there. But, it was the day some JW's came along and read their version of John 1:1...that Jesus was A GOD, that I was convicted of the deity of Jesus Christ. I turned from their version, and dug out my Bible. There was no "A GOD" in my Bible. And when I heard the gospel preached within the next day or two...by a sheer "accident"...I fully comprehended the power of what I was hearing. That God, Himself, came down as a man and died on the cross. That was a whole new ball game for me. I never share the Gospel without pointing to John 1:1 first.

 

[Clete]

I would think the obvious way to test this out would be to ask those who know full well they are saved, what it was they believed from the first. I had heard Jesus died for our sins over and over again, including bits and pieces here and there. But, it was the day some JW's came along and read their version of John 1:1...that Jesus was A GOD, that I was convicted of the deity of Jesus Christ. I turned from their version, and dug out my Bible. There was no "A GOD" in my Bible. And when I heard the gospel preached within the next day or two...by a sheer "accident"...I fully comprehended the power of what I was hearing. That God, Himself, came down as a man and died on the cross. That was a whole new ball game for me. I never share the Gospel without pointing to John 1:1 first.

I think that is a totally valid thing to do. I'm just not convinced that anyone needs to understand more than what I have in the opening post in order to cross over the threshold from unsaved to saved.

 

[Clete]

A raven and a black pickup truck have "almost no resemblance" between them but have at least "some resemblance" to each other (they're both black).

Doesn't make them the same thing though.

One's an animal, the other is a machine.

Comparing the Mormon God and the Mormon Jesus to the God and Jesus of the Bible are like trying to compare a raven with a black pickup truck. They may be the same color, but there really is no way to compare them.

Exactly. Well said!

Sitting in my garage doesn't make me similar enough to a car to call me one.

 

[Stripe]

I would say that the necessary and sufficient conditions for salvation in response to hearing the gospel is that you confess Jesus Christ as Lord and risen savior.

I don't know that it would be possible to go through Mormon teachings to arrive at that place. But it might happen.

 

[Idolater]

A raven and a black pickup truck have "almost no resemblance" between them but have at least "some resemblance" to each other (they're both black).

Doesn't make them the same thing though.

One's an animal, the other is a machine.

Comparing the Mormon God and the Mormon Jesus to the God and Jesus of the Bible are like trying to compare a raven with a black pickup truck. They may be the same color, but there really is no way to compare them.

It's a categorical error, to believe that Jesus Christ is Not God. He's in the same category as idols of stone, silver, or gold, if that were the case; 'created things;' not the Creator. It's a black/white error. It's binary. On or off, up or down. It's like mistakenly saying 'nothing,' when you're trying to saying 'absolutely everything.' That's what Clete was saying, that unitarians don't nullify whatever faith they have, just for their unitarianism. So why are Mormons disqualified then? I understand that you and Clete and many others contend that Mormonism is even more wayward than unitarians who are otherwise 'orthodox,' but how much more of an error could there possibly be, than to think that Christ Jesus is not God Himself? To my mind, there isn't one, and everybody who doesn't believe Christ is God Himself is in the same boat, though maybe in different parts of that boat. So long as they all believe that Christ's Resurrection is an historical fact though, I contend that their boat is tethered to the Ark that is Christian faith.

 

[JudgeRightly]

It's a categorical error, to believe that Jesus Christ is Not God. He's in the same category as idols of stone, silver, or gold, if that were the case; 'created things;' not the Creator. It's a black/white error. It's binary. On or off, up or down. It's like mistakenly saying 'nothing,' when you're trying to saying 'absolutely everything.' That's what Clete was saying, that unitarians don't nullify whatever faith they have, just for their unitarianism. So why are Mormons disqualified then? I understand that you and Clete and many others contend that Mormonism is even more wayward than unitarians who are otherwise 'orthodox,' but how much more of an error could there possibly be, than to think that Christ Jesus is not God Himself? To my mind, there isn't one, and everybody who doesn't believe Christ is God Himself is in the same boat, though maybe in different parts of that boat. So long as they all believe that Christ's Resurrection is an historical fact though, I contend that their boat is tethered to the Ark that is Christian faith.

They think He is NOT God, that He is "a god"

 

[turbosixx]

Mormons, for example, believe that Jesus died and rose from the dead but they are a long way from believing the gospel.

Hey Clete,
Long time.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but based on your Gospel Proper, don't the Mormons meet that and are therefore Christians?

 

[turbosixx]

I, of course, agree with this but I'm not so sure that someone must know this fact in order to get saved.

I agree. His deity is alluded to but He's often of spoke plainly as a man, for example:

Acts 13:38 Let it be known to you therefore, brothers, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,

 

[john w]

Of course! As I said, I completely agree that Jesus is the Creator God (Romans 1) and that His divinity is part of what qualifies Him to be a sacrifice for the sins of the world and that the whole thing falls apart if Jesus is a mere man. I understand and fully agree with all of that. What I question is whether this particular truth is one of those that a person must understand and believe in order to get saved. Is this aspect of biblical truth one that an evangelist must go ever with a potential convert in their discussions about the gospel and getting saved? Is this particular truth a prerequisite for salvation or can the understanding of it come after?

It seems to me that it could come after. You seem to think otherwise. I'm open to being convinced that you're right.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I know that you assert that he is God. My issue is that you assert that acknowledging this truth is not necessary to be saved.


Wrong.

 

[Idolater]

They think He is NOT God, that He is "a god"

OK. So you've got the Mormons doing something other than the 'typical' unitarian/Arian, by not only denying that He is YHWH/YHVH, but that He is some other 'god' instead. OK. Let me think about that one. Part of me still wants to say that grace prevails in their case, and that they are only believing what their deceived leaders teach them, and that if they were instructed correctly, that they too would believe that He is not some other 'god,' but God the Creator Himself. But let me think on it.

 

[JudgeRightly]

OK. So you've got the Mormons doing something other than the 'typical' unitarian/Arian, by not only denying that He is YHWH/YHVH, but that He is some other 'god' instead.

Not me. That's just what they believe...

They also have a bible in a three ring binder that they add to when new "scripture" is "revealed."

OK. Let me think about that one. Part of me still wants to say that grace prevails in their case,

Why would it?

If someone believes a lie, then they are not believing the truth. Grace is only given to those who believe the Truth.

and that they are only believing what their deceived leaders teach them, and that if they were instructed correctly, that they too would believe that He is not some other 'god,' but God the Creator Himself. But let me think on it.

 

[Clete]

Hey Clete,
Long time.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but based on your Gospel Proper, don't the Mormons meet that and are therefore Christians?

No.

Under no circumstance could it be rightly stated that anyone who calls themselves Mormon is saved - period.

Everything has a context, including the list of doctrines in the opening post. As I noted in the post, I started to go point for point and give some comentary and context to each point. The fact that I didn't do that is what makes your question a valid one to ask. In short, the reason it wouldn't work for a Mormon is because they have different meanings for the words. Their Jesus is an entirely different Jesus, the similarities between their Jesus and Christianity's are there to provide camoflage. Their use of the bible as well as a lot of the same terminology is the sheep's clothing on the wolf.

Clete

 

[Clete]

I agree. His deity is alluded to but He's often of spoke plainly as a man, for example:

Acts 13:38 Let it be known to you therefore, brothers, that through this man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,

Just to reiterate and to make myself perfectly crystal clear on this point, I fully endorse, believe and proudly proclaim the deity of Jesus Christ and I do not believe that this biblical fact can be reasonably denied nor do I think that it's even a debatable aspect of normal Christian doctrine.

I only question whether this fact is something that one must understand in order to get saved. I'm not questioning it because I think there's wiggle room on the issue where there's sufficient biblical ambiguity on the subject that would permit someone to be legitimately confused about it. It's just that I'm not certain that this particular point has to be taught, understood and accepted prior to becoming a member of the body of Christ.

Not that you're challenging me on any of that, I just thought your post made for a good opportunity to really make myself super-duper clear.

Clete

 

[Clete]

I know that you assert that he is God. My issue is that you assert that acknowledging this truth is not necessary to be saved.


Wrong.

Okay, fine. But, as you know I am fond of reminding people, saying it doesn't make it so.

I'm not wrong merely because you've stated as much. Please establish that anyone who does not yet know, understand and accept the deity of Jesus Christ is also not yet saved.

This is precisely the reason I've started the thread. I want to get the gospel proper nailed down as tight as possible so that when I use it in future discussions and debates I'll know that I'm on really solid ground. Your help will be greatly appreciated. It will be the quintessential iron sharpening iron.

Clete

 

[Clete]

OK. So you've got the Mormons doing something other than the 'typical' unitarian/Arian, by not only denying that He is YHWH/YHVH, but that He is some other 'god' instead. OK. Let me think about that one. Part of me still wants to say that grace prevails in their case, and that they are only believing what their deceived leaders teach them, and that if they were instructed correctly, that they too would believe that He is not some other 'god,' but God the Creator Himself. But let me think on it.

Do you believe that God will accept, "We only believed what our decieved teachers taught us!", as a valid defense on Judgement Day?

If so, just how many gospels do you believe there are? I mean, that's got to describe every Jew, Muslim, Hindu and Taoist in existence, right?

 

[turbosixx]

No.

Under no circumstance could it be rightly stated that anyone who calls themselves Mormon is saved - period.

Everything has a context, including the list of doctrines in the opening post. As I noted in the post, I started to go point for point and give some comentary and context to each point. The fact that I didn't do that is what makes your question a valid one to ask. In short, the reason it wouldn't work for a Mormon is because they have different meanings for the words. Their Jesus is an entirely different Jesus, the similarities between their Jesus and Christianity's are there to provide camoflage. Their use of the bible as well as a lot of the same terminology is the sheep's clothing on the wolf.

Clete

I'm not very familiar with their teaching. I haven't run across one yet.

 

[turbosixx]

Just to reiterate and to make myself perfectly crystal clear on this point, I fully endorse, believe and proudly proclaim the deity of Jesus Christ and I do not believe that this biblical fact can be reasonably denied nor do I think that it's even a debatable aspect of normal Christian doctrine.

I agree.

I only question whether this fact is something that one must understand in order to get saved. I'm not questioning it because I think there's wiggle room on the issue where there's sufficient biblical ambiguity on the subject that would permit someone to be legitimately confused about it. It's just that I'm not certain that this particular point has to be taught, understood and accepted prior to becoming a member of the body of Christ.

Not that you're challenging me on any of that, I just thought your post made for a good opportunity to really make myself super-duper clear.

Clete

I agree with you on this. When we look at what was taught to convert people, it's my understanding it was very simple and to the point.

 

[Idolater]

Do you believe that God will accept, "We only believed what our decieved teachers taught us!", as a valid defense on Judgement Day?

I kind of do, yeah. Them not being teachers provides them sort of a blanket of protection, that their teachers, but especially the knowingly fraudulent founder(s) of their religion, do not possess. Although even there, I do believe that it is still possible that this Joseph Smith still believed in Christ, even though he perpetuated a fraud, on what turns out to be many millions of people by now. iow, there is no sin that Christ's Passion and cross can't cover over. There does have to be authentic Christian faith though, and that must be in Christ's Resurrection, even if all the theology surrounding that historical event is completely wrong.

If so, just how many gospels do you believe there are? I mean, that's got to describe every Jew, Muslim, Hindu and Taoist in existence, right?

The only authentic Gospel is the one the authentic Christian faith believes in and teaches. But how many of those other people believe that God raises the dead, and that Christ Himself is risen from the dead? That's been my claim itt from the start, I wan't talking about people who didn't believe in the Resurrection; just those that do.