Larry Cotrell

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Larry Cotrell last won the day on January 13 2017

Larry Cotrell had the most liked content!

About Larry Cotrell

  • Birthday 02/05/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Theology, Politics, and Pickleball -In that order
  • Religion
    Evangelical Christian

Contact Methods

Recent Profile Visitors

1795 profile views

Larry Cotrell's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (4/4)



  1. Agreed, the nature of the infinite God is far beyond what the finite brain can comprehend, let alone what the finite brain can explain in human words. That being said, if someone who doesn't believe in the Trinity asks me to explain it, me simply saying that it can't be explained would be a disappointing answer to anyone and everyone. So, I explain it the best I can, but at some point, it is beyond human words. Some say that if it can't be understood completely, it doesn't make sense to believe it and/or is probably not true. However, wouldn't one expect that the fullness of the very nature of God would be beyond human comprehension? I think so. I believe that if man could fully understand the nature of God, it would probably be a god that man himself made up because God would be bigger than the man He created. So in short, yes I can't fully understand or explain it. But no, I don't see that as a problem, but rather I see it as a strength. *I am not saying that you think this way or are arguing this way. However, I know a lot of people do think this way, and there are probably a few of them trudging through this thread.
  2. My father, grandfather, and grandmother were ministers, so I grew up around it and always had people smarter than me that I could ask about anything. It went a little like this, "So Dad, just one really quick question, what were the Nephilim?" I agree with @prisonchaplain here that the difference is if they are one in purpose or one in substance, and I believe it is a major difference. At least we understand each other now
  3. Always happy to explain First, there are three things to understand: 1) Jesus was fully God (John 4:49, Matthew 28:20, Matthew 8:26-27, John 8:58, and a whole lot more) 2) Jesus was fully man (1 John 4:2, 2 John 7) and therefore experienced human emotions (John 4:6, John 19:28, Matthew 4:2, John 11:35) 3) The Son is relationally subordinate to the father, meaning that His job is to do the will of the father, never the other way around (Luke 22:42, Hebrews 10:7). However, no part of the Trinity is inferior in nature or essence. (Matthew 28:19, John 10:30) Yes, God is three distinct persons eternally existing as one being, or essence (John 1:1-5). So here's where I actually answer the question: Jesus prayed to the Father, who is a separate person. In His combination of divineness and humanness, He knew the pain he was going to go through and didn't want to go through it. However, because He was sent to do the Father's will, and they are one being or essence, He asks the Father, " Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done" (Luke 22:42).
  4. True, it has snuck into everything (obviously somewhat subtly) and I think there are too many other variables to directly relate the movies' success to the "SJWism." That being said, I do agree with @The Folk Prophet that the entertainment industry is one of Satan's greatest weapons, as he makes wrong things seem "cool" or normal and evil things seem trivial. I do think we need to be increasingly aware of how what we are putting in affects us because what we put in goes straight to our heart and comes back out through our actions. (I'm not necessarily talking about feminism, but things like homosexuality, sorcery, and the like.) David set the ultimate example when he said, " I will set no wicked thing before mine eyes: I hate the work of them that turn aside; it shall not cleave to me" (Psalm 101:3). (Wish I could say I follow this perfectly, but it's definitely something to work on )
  5. I just want to take a second to say that this thread has been successful in helping me (and probably @MaryJehanne as well) to better understand the LDS belief on this, so thank you all for taking the time to explain and articulate your thoughts. Much appreciated! There are (at least) two things standing in the way of me fully understanding the LDS belief on this issue: 1) LDS people disagree on some points of belief, just as any faith does, so understanding Person A's belief doesn't necessarily mean that you understand Person B's belief 2) Because we are from different faith backgrounds (LDS, Catholic, Protestant, etc.) most of the "theology" words mean different things from different perspectives. So, often when we think we are talking about the same thing, we really aren't. Learning each other's terminology goes a long way!
  6. Sincere apologies! I did not realize it was, as it did not seem to be. I have edited the comment to remove the name of the website and will be far more careful about this in the future. So, you were right. Sincere apologies!
  7. Yes, that is exactly why I'm on the forum, to clear about misconceptions I have about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and hopefully clarify common misconceptions about "traditional" Christianity as well.
  8. Well, then perhaps I have been misinformed. My apologies. I was not trying to misrepresent things, nor was my source anti-Mormon. The error comes from misunderstanding, not ill intent.
  9. I think that the confusion about the word polytheism (or more specifically henotheism/monolatry) comes not from Athanasian Trinity vs. LDS Godhead, but from the belief in other gods outside of our world. “If we should take a million of worlds like this and number their particles, we should find that there are more Gods than there are particles of matter in those worlds.” - Apostle Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, v. 2, p. 345, February 18, 1855 I am not trying to label or call people names (I know you all get tired of being called names), but to clarify where the confusion is for most "Traditional" Christians, as we are called.
  10. Completely agreed. Only one I'm hungry
  11. This conservative student at the University of Michigan decided that his* pronoun would be "His Majesty." *Correction, His Majesty's pronoun would be...
  12. @Telemantros, Welcome! Everyone (well, we'll say 99.999% of everyone) is very kind and tolerant. The forum is just the right size because you feel like you know everyone but meet new people every day. If you're looking for good, open, and honest conversation, this is the place.
  13. Short Answer: When you're not sure, avoid gender-specific pronouns and you avoid the problem. How do you do that? I have a lot of family in Portland and have spent enough time there to deal with it. I've found that the best way to deal with "incorrect" pronouns is to avoid them when possible. If you're talking to them, you can use you. If you're talking about them when they can hear you, you can use their name (I've had to do this when I wasn't sure what gender they were). They also works, although not grammatically correct because it is technically for plurals, it sounds natural in everyday speech. When they can't hear you (normally when pronouns are used) it shouldn't matter unless the person you're talking to is militant about pronouns.
  14. Thank you for helping me to understand the reasons. Again, all I'm saying is that your typical Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox/Whatever won't understand all that ⬆️ when they pick up a Book of Mormon, not to mention the other differences in doctrine.
  15. (I know it's been a while but I was having Mormonhub withdrawals, love you guys!) I obviously can't speak for this Baptist minister, but I can speak as an Evangelical who has read the Book of Mormon. When Evangelicals read the Book of Mormon, they read it from an Evangelical perspective and background, so they don't understand the theological differences. For example, in Alma 11:44 Amulek tells Zeezrom: " but everything shall be restored to its perfect frame, as it is now, or in the body, and shall be brought and be arraigned before the bar of Christ the Son, and God the Father, and the Holy Spirit, which is one Eternal God, to be judged according to their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil." Evangelicals read this as the trinity even though that is obviously not what it means. My point is not to babble about the Trinity, but simply show that Evangelicals read The Book of Mormon incorrectly. *Again, I can't speak definitively for Dr. Lynn Ridenhour, and I don't mean to.