Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
| PentecostalTheology.com
Titus 3:4-7 (ESV):
4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
Who is our Savior: God (v4) or Jesus Christ (v6)? Are there two Saviors?
Troy Day
This Christological question represents a fundamental theological tension within Christian pneumatology. The identification of Christ as Savior within Pentecostal soteriology affirms the incarnational reality that Jesus Christ, as the Son, mediates divine redemption through his atoning work. Concurrently, the Godhead’s unified salvific function maintains God’s sovereignty in redemption while affirming the trinitarian framework that undergirds Pentecostal orthodox theology. Both particulars are integral to understanding biblical soteriology. @followers @highlight Philip Williams
Troy Day
@followers @john mushenhouse @phillip williams Kyle Williams
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse John Lathrop John Lombard Many scholars make only selective use of the traditional criterion of multiple attestation, excluding its application to the diverse and apparently independent accounts of Jesus’s resurrection appearances. Yet, Jesus’s post-resurrection message in the first-century sources that report it consistently focuses on mission (Matt 28:19; Luke 24:47–48; Acts 1:8; John 20:21–23) and, in connection with this mission, the empowerment of the Spirit (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4–5, 8; John 20:22) or Jesus’s presence (Matt 28:20).
The coherence of these sources need not rely on verbatim agreement: comparison with other ancient biographies shows that the Evangelists’ ancient audiences would not expect these reports to recount Jesus’s words verbatim.3 That Luke can summarize the heart of the commission in different wording in his own two accounts,4 clearly meant to be read together,5 confirms that he never expected anyone to think otherwise.
Still, if Jesus spent any substantial amount of time with his disciples (Acts 1:3), he probably did repeat some key themes multiple times and in multiple ways (1:4–5). Did Jesus himself command baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matt 28:19)? Or at the least, did he provide the raw material that quickly led to trinitarian belief among his followers? (For Matthew, baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit presumably evokes Jesus’s own baptism and experience of the Father and Spirit in Matt 3:16–17; cf. already Mark 1:10–12.)
Far from being a late development, as has often been supposed, Jesus’s divinity or Jesus as an object of worship appears in the earliest extant examples of New Testament Christology. While we cannot expect Paul to reflect later Nicene language, he often applies biblical language for YHWH to Jesus: for example, Zech 14:5 in 1 Thess 3:13; Deut 6:4 in 1 Cor 8:6; Isa 45:23 in Phil 2:9–11; and OT day of YHWH language in 1 Cor 1:8; 5:5; 2 Cor 1:14; Phil 1:6, 10; 2:16.6 Granted, his status appears subordinate to that of the Father in Paul (for example, Rom 8:3), but this remains the case even in the late first-century Christology of John’s Gospel https://www.pentecostaltheology.com/craig-keener-jesuss-trinity/
John Mushenhouse
The bible calls both savior.
Troy Day
John Mushenhouse well now our non theological friend Glynn Brown has blocked us and does not wish to discuss theology NO more with us here 🙂 theological nubs speak highly of themselves but lack the stamina you see They are all the same ONLY the name has changed I provided the proposed reply in my previous response. Here it is again for clarity:
Proposed Comment Reply:
“The framework presented here captures the essential scriptural reality: the question itself reflects a false dichotomy that collapses when we examine biblical soteriology more closely. Titus 3:4-7 establishes that God’s grace and Christ’s redemptive work function as unified salvific movements within the Godhead’s economy.
The Father wills salvation and establishes the covenant of grace; the Son accomplishes redemption through incarnation and atonement; the Spirit applies redemption through regeneration and sanctification. This triadic soteriology isn’t hierarchical but complementary—each person of the Godhead executes a distinct soteriological function within a unified purpose.
John Mushenhouse’s observation that “the Bible calls both Savior” is precisely correct—this isn’t contradiction but pneumatic mystery. The Pentecostal hermeneutic has always held that trinitarian theology transcends Aristotelian logic; we are dealing with divine mystery, not mathematical equations.
The tension dissolves when we recognize agency (who acts) versus affirmation (whose work is praised). Christ is THE Savior by unique redemptive work, yet God the Father is simultaneously Savior in sustaining creation and activating the redemptive plan. This maintains both Christ’s particularity and God’s universality—core to Pentecostal orthodoxy
Glynn Brown
Troy Day why do you keep lying? I haven’t blocked anyone,You non theological cowboy. No one takes you seriously,you’re just a self righteous idiot that thinks too highly of yourself. I’m ashamed to call you a Pentecostal.
Stop tagging me.