Justice

Yes, this is the one that brings me closest to understanding, except, as you mentioned, all 3 have to be present in the same condition at all times. That part of it is hard to grasp, but gets me closer than anything else I've heard.

About the time understanding the Trinity seems within my grasp, I read something like this, and then I'm totally lost again. I'm not going to give up, though.

It's not really a rumor, but something I noticed one day. Maybe I can start one. Circle April 2, 2030 on your calendar. It's 200 years since the organization of the church in modern times, and (a very close approximation) 2,000 years since Jesus started His mortal ministry. It could be an interesting day. It's also a Saturday, and will open General Conference. Not sure why the day intrigues me, but it does. It's circled on my calendar.

This makes sense to me. In fact, I did not press Him on any of these details. He revealed Himself to Joseph Smith, and many witnessed angels, gold plates, and Christ Himself, and it is all available for us to read. I read it. I did not press Him. I think He wants us to know. I don't think He wants us wondering or confused. But, we have to have an open mind and seek. I didn't start asking until I saw they had been revealed. They aren't a mystery to me. They aren't incomprehensible to me. I can explain them to you just as I understand them. That's something you cannot do with the Trintiy belief (at least not yet). Yet, we believe we are His literal children. Children are not disrespectful when they ask, in sincerity, "Father, who art thou?" He reveals what He will. The only reason these seem disrespectful to you is because you believe if He wanted us to understand then He would tell us, without us having to ask. Interestingly enough, He did tell us. I'm sharing with you what He said. This is my point. He has! And, He says the relationship does require the above. That the men who made up the Trinity were not inspiried when they did. The Church had fallen and men's views became corrupt. PC, it's a beautiful thing! We are offspring of God, just as Paul states. There isn't a single belief in the world that offers more vision of His love and relationship to us! I understand your difficulty being on an LDS forum. You can't very well say "you are just wrong." Open your mind if for a split second and see the possibilities of us being God's literal children. How amazing! How indescribable! How understandable God is! I love you, PC, and I appreciate the discussion. I have learned a lot even if I don't understand.

Lot of things coming into play here, Shelly. First, God is not a name, but a title or rank. That can help define your question about how Jesus is called God. We believe that He is. But, we also believe He is not the Father, but the Father is God too. Make sense? Much like 2 generals, General Bob and General Mike. Mike and Bob are both Generals, but Mike is not Bob and Bob is not Mike, but both are generals. We believe spirit is matter. We believe it exists like our physical bodies exist, but not by blood. Joseph Smith taught that spirit matter is more fine or pure than physical matter, and can only be discerned by purer eyes. God allowed the brother of Jared to see His spirit body, because of his faith, just like Moses saw Him face to face. Because the spirit of God was upon the brother of Jared he was able to see the future, and that God (Jehovah, or the pre-mortal CHrist) would take upon Himself flesh and blood. You have to read it a lot of times. I hope I helped.

I can't say I've ever heard it given a value... so I don't know if it's true.

Yes, PC, it is my belief that my questions are based on. I guess I'm remarakably surprised that Christians can believe so differently about even the most basic of concepts, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. If we don't honor the definitions of words then there's no hope to teach, or at least to understand each other. When we have our own definitions for words that we understand so simply otherwise, it brings to light the words Joseph Smith spoke about the Bible: 11 While I was laboring under the extreme difficulties caused by the contests of these parties of religionists, I was one day reading the Epistle of James, first chapter and fifth verse, which reads: If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. 12 Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart. I reflected on it again and again, knowing that if any person needed wisdom from God, I did; for how to act I did not know, and unless I could get more wisdom than I then had, I would never know; for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible. And not just passages, but the very words the themselves. I was hoping for understanding. I don't have it. I'm not the kind of person that can sidestep logic with blind belief, whether or not I believe the Bible "says" one thing or the other. At the foundation of my belief is that God knows everything, and He knows us. Also, I believe the events in scripture teach more than the actual words. For example: Jesus was born of a mortal mother. That speaks volumes of who He is and His relationship to us. We should use that to help us understand the words, not ignore it and think that a man can be born as an ant (bad example, but I can't think of another way to make my point). So, instead of ignoring what happened in scripture and seeking simply to understand the words, God used events to teach us far more than mere words can. I don't have a problem with mysteries. There are things that we don't or even can't understand as mortals. But, when something (mystery or not) goes against logic and what happened in scripture (not just word interpretation), I have a very difficult time with it. Jesus was born of a mortal mother, and all Christians believe that much. In the Bible I "read" Jesus was born of a mortal mother, and I "read" God is His Father. That speaks volumes of who He is. The events should center your interpretation of the words, not vice verse. You (PC, Maureen, and Shelly) have no idea how much I apprecaite your willingness to answer my questions and try to help me understand what you believe. I do appreciate it. And, you have no idea for how long I've wanted to get some morsel or tidbit that helps me understand (not just comprehend the words) the Trinity as believers see it. As of now I am unable to even take a first step in trying to see what you see. I see the words as you do, and I can explain them better, but as far as my purpose for this thread, that I might be able to understand something; anything, about your belief in God, it did not have the impact on me I had hoped. Comprehending the words is one thing, I even struggle with that, but understanding them, even in the least degree, it seems I can't. Maureen, what I'm trying to express is bit different than what you express about our beliefs. You say you can never believe that God was once a man, even though it offers a solution to the dilemma about how Jesus can be God's Son. The words are understandable (son means offspring) but you choose to believe something else, something else where the words have to have different meanings and the belief can't be understood. In my case, I'm asked to understand a very basic word different than I ever have (son), while the belief that drives it can't be understood or explained. If I had a nibble, or a small step... if I could either understand how you believe "son" or if I can understand anything about 3=1, I'd probably come up with a bunch more questions. I've found one small step of understanding usually brings more questions. I know when I first heard that God was once a man it brought up a lot of questions. And maybe to help you understand a bit more about my belief (I know you didn't ask and may not care), it's technically not that God was once a man and has changed from a man as we know it to the God that you believe in. That step is impossible. It's that "man" is just our species term for the mortal part of His existence. He has always been the same Being. For a poor example I use a caterpillar and a butterfly. It is the same "individual," just at a different stage of existence.

Helaman 12 may be discussing a not-so popular sign of the times. 2 Yea, and we may see at the very time when he doth prosper his people, yea, in the increase of their fields, their flocks and their herds, and in gold, and in silver, and in all manner of precious things of every kind and art; sparing their lives, and delivering them out of the hands of their enemies; softening the hearts of their enemies that they should not declare wars against them; yea, and in fine, doing all things for the welfare and happiness of his people; yea, then is the time that they do harden their hearts, and do forget the Lord their God, and do trample under their feet the Holy One—yea, and this because of their ease, and their exceedingly great prosperity. If this great time of prosperity and relative ease for so many isn't a sign of times, then it certainly is a test. This kind of test may be part of the great sifting that is to be done before He comes again.

Well, obviously, PC, it is a curiosity of mine as to how one can be a son and not be offspring. That's the purpose of this thread. You asked the question I am asking: How do you propose that I digest a belief that Jesus was literally birthed with my belief that Jesus is co-eternal and co-equal with the Father? That's what I'm asking. It's not my belief, but yours. I'm hoping to get some more insight, after having had time to ponder, on how you solve this with your beliefs. My only conclusion is that you have to believe "Jesus is co-eternal" and not really offspring of the Father. It can't even be a physical offspring (His mortal body) because you believe the Father doesn't have a body. So, son but not offspring in any way. That's going to take me a long time to digest, if I ever can. So, I'm sure you see my difficulty, not believing in a Trinity, considering your difficulty having a belief in the Trinity. Shelly, I would say your belief that Mary was also conceived this way and lived a perfect life is the result of the traditions of corrupted church leaders. That's all I'll say on the matter, I don't really want this thread changed into a debate about Mary. I really appreciate your candid comments. As far as your questions: we believe that the Father has a body of flesh and bones whereby genetic material can be taken and used as the source DNA in Christ's conception, making Jesus also the begotten Son in the flesh of the Father, aside from being literal offspring of the Father in the spirit. As to specifically how His genetic source code was actually used, we can only speculate. How do you define "begotten" exactly, because I can't understand your comaprison to begotten and how Christ can be co-eternal with the Father. I picture begotten having a specific meaning, and it is close to offspring. Maybe I'm wrong?

Used in the past to describe "son" in general or that Jesus Christ is the "symbolic or adoptive" Son of God?

So, coming full circle... Now that everyone has had over a week to think about it, can believers in the Trinity accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, as our language defines "son," or does it need to be a symbolic or created type of sonship to fit with that particular belief system? What role does the word "begotten" play, and is "begotten son" different than "son?" Have your thoughts been exapanded or enlarged on this topic since it started? Has anyone had any "aha" moments while pondering comments in this thread?

I agree with the comments so far. Repentance is what activates the atonement in our lives. There are no sins that are unforgivable if repented of. I believe the unforgivable sin is "denying the Holy Ghost" which is another way of saying "refusing to repent." If you believe there is a sin that cannot be forgiven if repented of then you limit the power of the atonement, which is infinite and eternal, since repentance is the condition for it's application. Doctrine & Covenants 19: 4 And surely every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless. 5 Wherefore, I revoke not the judgments which I shall pass, but woes shall go forth, weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth, yea, to those who are found on my left hand. 6 Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to this torment, but it is written endless torment. 7 Again, it is written eternal damnation; wherefore it is more express than other scriptures, that it might work upon the hearts of the children of men, altogether for my name’s glory. 8 Wherefore, I will explain unto you this mystery, for it is meet unto you to know even as mine apostles. 9 I speak unto you that are chosen in this thing, even as one, that you may enter into my rest. 10 For, behold, the mystery of godliness, how great is it! For, behold, I am endless, and the punishment which is given from my hand is endless punishment, for Endless is my name. Wherefore— 11 Eternal punishment is God’s punishment. 12 Endless punishment is God’s punishment. 13 Wherefore, I command you to repent, and keep the commandments which you have received by the hand of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., in my name; 14 And it is by my almighty power that you have received them; 15 Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not. 16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; 17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; 18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink— 19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men. 20 Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I humble you with my almighty power; and that you confess your sins, lest you suffer these punishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have tasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit.

So you believe it hasn't happened yet. Even when considering that Christ and some of the Apostles talked about how soon it was happeneing even in their day?

The government of America, and it's military, took their land. They were considered "savage" and therefore had no rights to land claims. A lot of retaliation happened as a result, and a lot of Indians lost their lives. Most of the rest were forced to live on Reservations set up by the American government. The majorty of those in government and in the military were professed Christians. Those same Christians (individual people that belonged to those denominations) kicked the early Mormons out of there homes and lands, not once, not twice, but at least three different times. I'm not accusing a church, but people who professed to be Christian who belonged to those churches. Genocide, no... but unfair and cruel treatment, yes. Not as a faith tradition, but whether siding with or against their respective clergy, it was quite the opposite of what it means to be Christian.

They were not persecuted because of their religious beliefs. The "Mormons" (who believe in Christ) were persecuted by those who claimed to be Christian. I find it ironic that part of the reason people moved to America was for religious freedom... and then to persecute others for their religious belief, especially when they claimed to believe in the same Redeemer... does that sound like those people were following Christ or allowing religious freedom?

What about the "falling way" that has to come before Christ returns, that was even starting during the time of the Apostles?

A priest or Bishop cannot ordain an Apostle. He does not have the authority or power to give the keys of a higher office he does not hold. An Apostle is a higher authortiy and has all lower authority as well, so they can ordain priests and Bishops. Again, we learn this through modern revealtion, but you have to admit it makes sense. It's like a common floor laborer in a factory deciding who the next CEO of the company will be. That won't happen, just as it can't happen in the Priesthood. When an Apostle dies, the remaining Apostles are the only ones who hold those keys and authority on earth. A Seventy or Partiarch do not even hold them. Once the last Apostle was taken from the earth it became necessary for that authority to be restored by someone who holds that authority and those keys. Peter, James, and John appeared to Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdrey and restored those keys and authority to the earth. Apostolic succession can only be continued if it is an unbroken chain of Apostles who are calling Apostles. That is why it is called "Apostolic succession." It's not called "Apostolic, priest, and Bishop succession."

2 Thess 2: 1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. 3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Galatians 1: 6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. The Apostles had their hands full trying to keep false doctrines from entering the church. The first that I'm familiar with is that those who were converted Jews felt Gentiles need to enter Christ's gospel through the Law of Moses, and they needed to be circumcised, and everything else under the Jewish law. They had a very hard time with that one. These verse show that the Gentiles also were bringing in false doctrines and the Apostles corrected them and put down the false teachings. It's very easy to see that decades after they were gone, there's no telling what kind of false beliefs and teachings entered the church. But, as I said before, the primary reason for the falling away was that of authority, which is no longer believed to be needed. A reformation could correct some false teachings, but a restoration was needed for authority to be replaced on the earth again.

Or even worse, both 3 and 1 at the same time. "One in purpose and will" cleanly solves the puzzle because one is no longer a number that contradicts 3.

Why is it a stretch? It is, afterall, a valid use of the word. Plus, I'll again, have you read John 17 lately?

From another angle, they have been raising the bar for missionaries and who they deem is "worthy" to enter the mission field. Maybe it's a change that's spreading.

Heavenly Father possesses them all. He directs the use of His power and authority to bring about His purposes, which are to bring about the immortality and exaltation of His children. He can give portions of His power to whomever He wishes to help bring about His will.

Shelly, I'd like to take a bit and explain something about the "falling away" or apostasy that happened to the church, and why we believe it was more significant than just loosing some teachings that could have easily been "re-added" back to Christianity. We believe Christ gave the Apostles the power and authority to act for God on earth. Matthew 18:18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. During Christ's mortal ministry He taught the Apostles what needed to be done in order for a man to be saved, or how a man can apply Christ's atoning sacrifice to himself. Ordinances were involved. When they perform these ordinances, like baptism, it needed to be binding (or sealed) in heaven as well as on earth. If a man did not have this authority God did not have to honor it. If it was not sealed or bound in heaven, what good would it do when a man died? Now, to the teachings and doctrines that were lost. In some instances truths (teachings and doctrines) were removed from the scriptres held by the church, so that the church could more readily enforce it's hold on the doctrines. In some instances some words were added to help clarify a belief held by church leaders. In some instances words were changed so the scriptures would more accurately reflect the church's views. So, removed, added, and changed. The above is a reality, but is not the basis or primary factor for our belief in an apostasy. Once the Apostles, or general leaders of the church, were killed, they were not replaced. Once the Apostles were gone there was no more authority to direct the affairs of the general church. Bishops remained, but they were in charge of their local parish or church. They never did have the authority to dictate doctrine or conduct the affairs of the general church. The loss of the authority was more important than the loss of any doctrines. The example I give is that of baptism. The true ordinance of baptism was lost. Through the Book of Mormon it was restored. We learn that infants are saved through Christ's atonement until they reach the age of accountability. This means that "original sin" is a false teaching, or misunderstood. Infants are innocent, through Christ's atonement, at birth because they are not responsible for Adam's choices. Baptism also must be by immerision. The Book of Mormon makes it perfectly clear. It is the resurrected Christ who is teaching this personally to the people in ancient America. But, let's say a church did all this perfectly, the baptism would still not be binding unless it was attended to by those with proper authority, the authority Christ gave His Apostles. So, the loss of the general authority to guide the church meant it had to be restored from heaven. The loss of the Priesthood trumps the loss of teachings and doctrines. Man made it's own priesthood and it was recognized by the surviving church, but it was not recognized by God because it was not conferred by one who had been rightfully given the Priesthood. Man chose and selected the leaders of the Church, not God, and they did not have His authority to lead the church (Priesthood keys). You cannot pass on or give whay you do not have. So, the church wandered through the Dark Ages. Heavenly messengers vistied the earth and restored this same sealing or binding power that Christ gave to His Apostles. Now then, the ordinances, if performed according to commandment, can once again be honored and sealed in heaven. I hope this helps you understand why we believe the church lost it's authority, and it needed to be restored from heaven, not just simply doctrines needing to be "added, removed, or changed" by men.

I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me... When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, estanding above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him! Joseph Smith?History 1 This simple testimony unravels all the false notions that were handed down by the fallen church for over 1500 years. With this and subsequent visions, and being taught by messengers from the presence of God like John the Baptist, Peter, James, and John, Moses, Elijah, and others... we understand as much, or more, about the nature of God than did those who saw Him anciently. Because of a prophet, we know God the Father has a glorified, perfected body of flesh and bones, just as Christ does. So, we don't get hung up on trying to interpret the words of the Bible, but we project what prophets teach about God into the Bible to gain a greater insight as to what is being taught. In short, we interpret the words of the Bible through the medium of modern revelation.

You asked a lot of valid questions about our beliefs. I like to limit the amount of things discussed at one time. Jesus worshipped The Father. The Father is the Supreme Being. The Son acts under His direction. The Son conformed His will to the will of the Father. We worship God the Father. The Son is also part of the Godhead, making Him God. He is the Savior of the world, but only because the Father sent Him. Very confusing. However, I do appreciate you taking the time to try to explain it. I will read your words many times and try to digest them.