I am no way a liberal person of theology. Why do you continue to make false accusations? Where did I speak about the Trinity and the doctrine that deals with salvation? And I am fine with others worshiping false gods?
Historically, belief in the Trinity was not regarded as some minor or optional Christian doctrine. Early Christian writers and Protestant Reformers, including non-Calvinist Reformers, treated rejection of the Trinity or the deity of Christ as heresy or serious doctrinal error.
Scripture also establishes the principle that it is not enough merely to claim that one worships God or believes in Jesus. God must be worshiped according to truth, and a false conception of God or Christ can amount to false worship.
Biblical Basis:
John 4:22–24 —
Jesus says, “Ye worship ye know not what... the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth.”
True worship therefore requires truth about God, not merely sincerity or religious devotion.
John 8:24 —
Jesus says, “if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.”
Jesus makes correct belief concerning His identity a matter of eternal consequence.
Romans 1:23–25 —
Paul says that men “changed the glory of the uncorruptible God,” “changed the truth of God into a lie,” and “worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator.”
This directly condemns replacing the truth about God with a false conception and then worshiping according to that error.
Taken together, these passages establish an important biblical principle: it is not enough merely to claim that one worships God or believes in Jesus. God must be worshiped “in truth,” Christ must be believed according to who He truly is, and changing the truth about God into a false conception is condemned by Scripture.
This is particularly relevant to the Trinity. A person may still use the words “Father,” “Son,” “Holy Ghost,” or “Jesus,” while redefining who they are. Scripture shows that merely retaining biblical names does not make a fundamentally altered conception of God acceptable.
#1. Athanasius — c. A.D. 356–360 — Against the Arians, Discourse I
Athanasius says,
“the faith of Christians acknowledges the blessed Triad.”
He contrasts this Christian faith with the Arians and says, “such heretics no Christian would bear.”
He also refers to their teachings as “Arian blasphemies.”
This is particularly significant because Athanasius does not merely say that he personally believes in the Trinity. He explicitly says that “the faith of Christians” acknowledges the Trinity and describes those opposing this doctrine as heretics.
Source:
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/28161.htm
#2. Gregory Nazianzen — A.D. 381 — Oration 42
Gregory warns against departing from the Trinity in either direction. He says Christians must not be “like the Sabellians, assailing the Trinity” nor “like the Arians, assailing the Unity.”
He calls the Arian position “an impious distinction” and then gives the Christian confession: “the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, of one Substance and glory.”
Gregory therefore does not treat rejection or corruption of the Trinity as merely another acceptable interpretation among Christians. He explicitly describes the Arian alternative as impious.
Source:
https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310242.htm
#3. Martin Luther — 16th century
Luther says that the doctrine concerning the Trinity “has been always assaulted and opposed.”
He then refers to Cerinthus, who denied Christ's true deity, as “that heretic.”
Luther states, “Christ is true God with God the Father, and that the Holy Ghost is true God,” while also explaining that “there are not three Gods.”
Thus, Luther directly associates the denial of Christ's true deity with heresy, while affirming the full deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.
Source:
https://ccel.org/ccel/l/luther/tabletalk/cache/tabletalk.pdf
#4. Menno Simons — 16th century — Complete Works
Menno Simons is particularly interesting because he was a leading Anabaptist Reformer, not a Calvinist, and his theology strongly emphasized obedience and perseverance rather than unconditional eternal security.
Menno specifically discusses Arius and says, “Arius was deemed a heretic, because he said that Christ had a beginning!”
Menno responds, “This is right,” and elsewhere plainly confesses, “the Father, his Word, and his Holy Ghost are one God.”
So even among the non-Calvinist Anabaptist wing of the Reformation, Arian denial of Christ's eternal deity was not regarded as an acceptable alternative Christian interpretation. Menno expressly accepts the classification of Arius as a heretic while affirming the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as one God.
Source:
https://ccel.org/ccel/simon/works2/works2.xv.vi.html
Conclusion:
So this is not merely a modern Fundamentalist position.
Scripture itself teaches that true worship must be “in truth” in John 4:24, that failing to believe rightly concerning Christ's identity can leave a person to “die in your sins” in John 8:24, and that changing “the truth of God into a lie” results in false worship in Romans 1:23–25.
Around A.D. 356–360, Athanasius said that “the faith of Christians acknowledges the blessed Triad” and called its Arian opponents heretics.
In A.D. 381, Gregory Nazianzen described the Arian corruption of the doctrine of God as impious.
During the Reformation, Luther likewise called a denier of Christ's true deity a heretic.
And even Menno Simons, representing the non-Calvinist Anabaptist side of the Reformation, agreed that Arius was rightly regarded as a heretic for teaching that Christ had a beginning.
Whatever disagreements these men had with one another on other doctrines, they were remarkably united on this point: the Trinity and the true deity of Christ belonged to fundamental Christian belief, while its outright rejection or fundamental redefinition was historically regarded as heresy rather than an ordinary secondary doctrinal disagreement.
....
