Maureen

Ammon made his strange moon statement back in April - I haven't seen him on the board in awhile. I doubt you'll get a speedy reply.M.

Yes Traveler, you. No, because one of the similar things about Judaism and Christianity is that they both share a common belief through scriptures that there is only one God. (ie Deut. 6:4) Your statement is crazy. You believe its impossible for there to exist only one God? Why? Because if God can't share his godhood, that's just not right? I'm not quite sure where you're coming from Traveler but it's not for me. I understand what I believe, yours makes no sense and is not supported by Judaic or Biblical scripture. M.

I'm surprised no one here has mentioned him yet since he's Mormon and lives in Utah. Jeopardy used to have a 5 day limit but not anymore. I can't remember how many days its been but this guy has already won over $400,000.00 dollars and he's still going. He's a genius and that's an understatement. My daughter and I have been watching him, we're in Awwwweeeee!!!! Here's an excerpt from a SL Tribune article: Spend 30 minutes with this genial whiz kid and you can see why challengers should be running for their almanacs. His machine-gun-like delivery reinforces what's going on in his head -- a furious thought process that can analyze and formulate answers with blazing speed. It's his forté. Well, that and a quick thumb on the buzzer button (about his ability to buzz in first, he says it's all about rhythm, "like a batter or a golfer"). "You have to read the clues as fast as you can. You've got to process it," he said. "You get an answer ready to go. Maybe you don't know it yet, but you know that you know it. You know that within five seconds maybe you can dredge it up." http://www.sltrib.com/2004/Jun/06162004/ut...utah/175928.asp M.

I’m slowly starting to see how you think Traveler. From your quote I’m guessing you believe in a multitude of Gods. You believe that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are really 3 gods. That’s why you find the Trinity so hard to accept, because the Trinity is emphatic about the existence of only one God (remember ehad).The Trinity denies this notion implying that without their unity they could not be G-d and G-d would cease to exist. If I am understanding the statement of yours correctly I would say Yes, that is correct. The Trinity sees God as the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. That God would not exist without all 3 persons of this godhead. In fact the Trinity states that God has always existed as these 3 persons. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. They are God individually and as a unity. They are not 3 separate Gods, they are one God (ehad). M.

I looked up the word “ehad”, just to make sure Traveler knew what he was talking about because sometimes I think he’s from another planet.From what I found (which was difficult), ehad means one as in singular or one as in unity. This statement of Traveler’s is strange: If this meaning is used it implies that there are by definition multiple G-ds. I totally disagree! It does not in any way mean multiple. In fact the word ehad when referring to God validates the Trinity, because Trinity is describing a Tri-unity. The 3 persons of the Godhead are a unity and exist together as one God. For example, this explanation: III. Unity of Multiple Entities Viewed as One The Bible gives us models or examples of heavenly things (cf. Hosea 12:10) to help us in understanding heavenly and divine concepts. It is God’s way of helping us to visualize heavenly concepts. By understanding the earthly example, we can transfer that understanding to the related heavenly concept, and, thus, come away with a better understanding of the heavenly concept. One example of this biblical modeling can be seen with the use of the Hebrew word “ehad” used in Deuteronomy 6:4-5, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.” (NKJ) This Hebrew word, used in this passage to describe the singularity and uniqueness of God, is the same Hebrew word used in Genesis 2:24, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” (NKJ). Here we have an example of two entities, that is, a man and wife, coming together and forming one entity. Each is a separate person and can function separately, but their union in marriage is to create a oneness. Here we have a model presented to us that can be used to help us understand the concept of the Trinity, that is, three “persons” comprising one divine substance, that of God. Obviously, the union of the husband and wife is not a perfect union into one, but it does give us an insight into the heavenly concept of the Trinity pointing to “one” being a perfect divine union of three. http://www.foundationsforourfaith.com/trinity.htm M.

Okay, I shouldn't get involved in this unusual battle between Snow and Jenda, but I'm curious. My opinion regarding Snow's posts has been that he is demonstrating how he defines modalism, trinitarianism and the Mormonm godhead. It can be very perturbing regarding trinitarianism because sometimes he gets it right and other times he's way out in left field. I am not reading (between the lines) that he his trying to promote (ram down our throats) his beliefs on others. He is stating how he understands these doctrines, what he finds confusing about some and therefore why he feels LDS godhead doctrine is acceptable to him. So therefore I am also at a loss why Jenda believes Snow is "impressing his beliefs on others" and why if he is, she sees that as a bad thing. M. PS: :) per·son (pûrsn) n. 1. A living human. 2. The composite of characteristics that make up an individual personality; the self. 3. The living body of a human. 4. Physique and general appearance.

Can you provide the name of this 12 year old? srm - You know perfectly well that broadway is probably referring to Helen Mar Kimball who was 14. She just got the age wrong. M.

Snow - I think the word "being" must be defined. I define it as person, therefore you are incorrect because Christ and the Father are different and separate persons in the Godhead. They are the same entity, meaning they are the same God (divine essense) but in that one divine essense they are 3 separate persons.It may not make sense but God does not have to make sense, that's what makes him God. And I find that the Athanasian Creed breaks the details of the trinity down to such detail that it makes sense to me - I love that creed. :) Jenda - I doubt though that Christians of today whether Catholic or Protestant do not fear of being named a heretic if they do not agree with the Trinity. Chances are they would find a different belief system that they could agree with. The inquisition ended centuries ago. M.

Sa·bel·li·an·ism n. A version of Monarchianism holding that the Godhead was differentiated only into a succession of modes or operations and that the Father suffered as much as the Son. sabellian \Sa*bel"li*an\, n. (Eccl. Hist.) A follower of Sabellius, a presbyter of Ptolemais in the third century, who maintained that there is but one person in the Godhead, and that the Son and Holy Spirit are only different powers, operations, or offices of the one God the Father. The above is synonmous with the definiton of modalism. Modalism sees God as one person who changes modes. Modalism does not see God as 3 persons, but as one person with 3 different modes of operation. Trinitarism: "NEVERTHELESS not my will, but mine, be done. ..." This is incorrect because even though Christ was fully God he was also subject to the Father. Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood. (Athanasian Creed)And since the trinity sees the Father and Christ as distinct persons it only makes sense that Christ would pray to the Father - and be bound by the will of the Father not his will. M.

It is a difficult question lurker. For one thing us mortals are finite beings and find it "difficult" to conceive of a infinite being. But to give it a try (a very weak try) I would say IMO that I would be able to see Christ (since he once was human and is now resurrected) and through him I would be able to differentiate him from the Father and the Holy Spirit. I have no idea how I could truely imagine the Father or the Holy Spirit. I personally give the Father anthropomorphic characteristics when I think about Him or pray to Him, but I have no idea what the Father really looks like.I like this description from Jason's link: He speaks of "the Trinity of God [the Father], His Word and His Wisdom... In a way I agree with Snow's version of "orthodox trinity understanding" except I could never say that Christ was praying to himself because even though I see "the three" as one divine entity, I cannot see the 3 persons of that entity as anything but separate from each other, personality wise, ego wise, if that makes any sense. There is only one God (divine entity) and they are that one God. M.

Obviously your own thoughts. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! It does just the opposite. I am not familiar with the word "ehad", but considering you got 1 to 3 wrong I wouldn't be surprised if this one is way off too. Only in your opinion. M.

I totally disagree! It is true that some people believe in modalism, but a person can believe in the Trinity without confusing it with modalism.I find it so strange that no matter how many times the Trinity is explained to show that the persons of the Godhead are distinct from each other, that that is usually ignored. I offer no Bible verses, since if you’re determined to not accept the Trinity in them, why bother. I offer the Athanasius Creed instead: The Creed of Saint Athanasius …That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity, neither confounding the Persons, nor dividing the Substance. For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one, the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost. The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal. And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. As also there are not three incomprehensibles, nor three uncreated, but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible. So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty, and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet they are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords, but one Lord. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be both God and Lord, So are we forbidden by the Catholic Religion, to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords. The Father is made of none, neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone, not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son, neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other; none is greater, or less than another; But the whole three Persons are co-eternal together and co-equal. So that in all things, as is aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. M.

I doubt it, he got the Soviet Union to change their mind.PS: Unorthodox, I like your signature. M.

...as evidenced by the bony protuberances on your forehead. The protuberance didn't start to grow until I started hanging out with all those Mormons. M.

Something like the officiating between the Calgary Flames and the Tampa Bay Lightning? It was a shame - they had no chance playing against a hockey team and the Refs! M.

I mutter those bashing comments to myself, so I do not feel the need to put them in print. I agree. SIGNED BY: Shanstress Unorthodox Jenda Maureen

Meaning your family, or kids' friends? Both! :) M.

Um... if you're not trying to be anti then how come you're trying to refute what everyone is saying? Really? "Everyone" you say. At least 7 people have responded to this thread, before your remark. Show me where shanstress has refuted everyone that has replied. M.

I voted for Other, as in non-Mormon. M.

Maureen have you ever been LDS? No, but was wishing to join when I was a silly seventeen year old. Parents would not give permission and I eventually changed my mind....but Mormons have been a part of my life ever since. Married into a Mormon family....some of my daughter's High School friends are LDS...they're everywhere, they're everywhere - even on this MB. M.

I was raised Lutheran and more or less, still am. M.

How does any normal person make a character judgement of anyone from the past? They're called biographies. And from what I've read concerning both men, JS III was a moral, ethical and conscientious man. Can't say the same for BY, IMO.M.

Jenda – Would you know the names of JS III’s progeny available now that could take over when W. Grant McMurray steps down. Are any women? Do you think the CofC would ever give the job to a “Smith” woman? M.

If I was one to believe in the Book of Mormon or believe that JS was a prophet; I would be more inclined to join the Community of Christ church (RLDS) than the LDS (Utah church). Maybe it's because I can relate to their set-up easier than the LDS - they have protestant characteristics - and JS III was a way nicer guy than BY. :) M.

splinter group n. A group, such as a religious sect or political faction, that has broken away from a parent group. A part of an organization that breaks away from the main body, usually owing to disagreement. Here are 2 links that give a list of the many splinter groups: http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dbowie/restore/r...estoration.html http://www.tektonics.org/mormondivide.html My favorite is The Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The title itself is an oxymoron. Pentecostals are one of the more noisier worshippers while IMO, Mormons tend to be too quiet. M.