What's so hard to understand about the Trinity vs. the LDS Godhead?

[darrel]

I think the premise that God is invisible is a very narrow perspective of His nature and purpose. The insistance that only the bible has the answer says that God is a changeable God. This is contrary to my belief and certainly not according to scripture.

Using scripture out of context and rejecting other evidence without looking at the whole cannon seems to be a ploy of the adversary. Just enough truth to give the appearance of authenticity but then subtlely lead away from the real truth of Gods Whole Saving Gospel.

[Faded]

I think that we've at least made good progress on the original subject: Creating a better understanding of the Trinity and Godhead doctrines.

Most Latter Day Saints, myself included, tend to mix up Unitarianism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia doctrine with Trinity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia doctrine. The question, "So Christ is talking to Himself?" has a semi-reasonable answer from the Trinity perspective, but not from the Unitarian perspective. The more I study it, the more I realize that the Trinity doctrine is a lot more similar to the Godhead doctrine than I used to think. The singular point of divergence, and the point where we feel that the Trinity doctrine strays from the truth, is the statement, "The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one substance, and one being." Without this uncomprehendable link between what is acknowledged by Trinitarians as three separate persons, we would have very little to disagree about on the matter. Many other divergences in doctrine stem from this one matter.

To a great extent, this stems from the fact that the LDS viewpoint is under constant attack. When you're constantly defending your beliefs from self-righteous and closed-minded antagonists, you don't tend to have much respect for their views. You don't tend to love the stick that someone is beating you with.

As with so many other doctrines, we would probably believe in the Trinity by default if God himself had not revealed something better to us through his prophets and apostles.

[abqfriend]

In ages past-early Christianity-there were many views circulating on who Jesus was and on such views as Trinity and non-Trinitarian views. There was no easy agreement. Such was the subject of many council's debate.

Creeds of the early church were one way to summarize and codify church beliefs in one way.

If you went to some remote Island that never heard of Christianity-and gave 100 people a Bible-and asked them to read it-then asked them about the concepts of Trinity or Godhead in simple terms-what would be their response?-I doubt you would have agreement.

So the LDS Church has it's prophets to clarify such things and more in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants and the proclamations of past and current prophet.

The Catholic Church has the Teaching Magesterium of the Church and Church Councils and the Pope to clarify such things in a different way. The Catholic Church believes it's leaders are guided by the holy spirit in all truth.

-so-no easy answers-we believe differently.

Let us work together where we can to a world hurting physically, emotionally and spiritually.

We each have the same Heavenly Father -who loves each of us very much.

-Carol

I think that we've at least made good progress on the original subject: Creating a better understanding of the Trinity and Godhead doctrines.

To a great extent, this stems from the fact that the LDS viewpoint is under constant attack. When you're constantly defending your beliefs from self-righteous and closed-minded antagonists, you don't tend to have much respect for their views. You don't tend to love the stick that someone is beating you with.

As with so many other doctrines, we would probably believe in the Trinity by default if God himself had not revealed something better to us through his prophets and apostles.

[Faded]

In ages past-early Christianity-there were many views circulating on who Jesus was and on such views as Trinity and non-Trinitarian views. There was no easy agreement. Such was the subject of many council's debate.

Creeds of the early church were one way to summarize and codify church beliefs in one way.

If you went to some remote Island that never heard of Christianity-and gave 100 people a Bible-and asked them to read it-then asked them about the concepts of Trinity or Godhead in simple terms-what would be their response?-I doubt you would have agreement.

So the LDS Church has it's prophets to clarify such things and more in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants and the proclamations of past and current prophet.

The Catholic Church has the Teaching Magesterium of the Church and Church Councils and the Pope to clarify such things in a different way. The Catholic Church believes it's leaders are guided by the holy spirit in all truth.

-so-no easy answers-we believe differently.

Let us work together where we can to a world hurting physically, emotionally and spiritually.

We each have the same Heavenly Father -who loves each of us very much.

-Carol

Couldn't agree with you more. I think the biggest thing I've learned is that the differences between the two doctrines are a lot smaller than I used to believe. I would say that the Trinity represents one of the best doctrinal outcomes that could have won out in the early days of the Christians. And I don't have to agree with it, but I respect anyone's belief in the Trinity.

In the end, we all have a loving Heavenly Father and we all rely on Jesus Christ. Ideally, if mainstream Christianity would just drop their unending assault of the LDS Faith and it's beliefs, they would find that we are ready and willing to work together to do a lot of good. We have wanted to work together for good things for a long time. Jesus expects us to be up and about doing good unto others and not arguing like little children over the same toy.

In my experience, Catholics are not making themselves part of the problem and are a strong voice for reconciliation and peaceful coexistance among all Christian faiths. This is highly admirable. Protestant faiths are getting there ... some more slowly that others. Some like PrisonChaplain are wonderful exceptions to the general rule. There is still a strong consensus among Christian denominations that "accepting the Mormons would be an unspeakable travesty." Hopefully we can see such sentiments fade away.

There are plenty of Latter Day Saints who would be hesitant to work together with other religions. Thankfully, our prophet and apostles are there to set them straight and we have a very strong tradition of listening to them. Based on what they've had to say recently, they are anxious to work with other religions for the common good. So I suppose it comes down to other denominations being willing to include us. We will take what opportunities we are given. Otherwise, we will do what we can on our own. The ball is in Traditional Christianity's court at this point. We'll see what they do next.

[Hemidakota]

Littlenipper, it is now on page 16...

[Hemidakota]

In ages past-early Christianity-there were many views circulating on who Jesus was and on such views as Trinity and non-Trinitarian views. There was no easy agreement. Such was the subject of many council's debate.

Creeds of the early church were one way to summarize and codify church beliefs in one way.

If you went to some remote Island that never heard of Christianity-and gave 100 people a Bible-and asked them to read it-then asked them about the concepts of Trinity or Godhead in simple terms-what would be their response?-I doubt you would have agreement.

So the LDS Church has it's prophets to clarify such things and more in the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants and the proclamations of past and current prophet.

The Catholic Church has the Teaching Magesterium of the Church and Church Councils and the Pope to clarify such things in a different way. The Catholic Church believes it's leaders are guided by the holy spirit in all truth.

-so-no easy answers-we believe differently.

Let us work together where we can to a world hurting physically, emotionally and spiritually.

We each have the same Heavenly Father -who loves each of us very much.

-Carol

Great point Carol....thumbs up to you

[LittleNipper]

I think the premise that God is invisible is a very narrow perspective of His nature and purpose. The insistance that only the bible has the answer says that God is a changeable God. This is contrary to my belief and certainly not according to scripture.

Using scripture out of context and rejecting other evidence without looking at the whole cannon seems to be a ploy of the adversary. Just enough truth to give the appearance of authenticity but then subtlely lead away from the real truth of Gods Whole Saving Gospel.

I think the premise that GOD is TOTALLY visible is a very limited human assessment of an all powerful, all knowing, eternal GOD, who can exist everywhere an anywhere at once......

If one wishes to read a verse of scripture in context, all one needs to do is read the entire chapter or even the book.

[darrel]

I think the premise that GOD is TOTALLY visible is a very limited human assessment of an all powerful, all knowing, eternal GOD, who can exist everywhere an anywhere at once......

If one wishes to read a verse of scripture in context, all one needs to do is read the entire chapter or even the book.

You know, I think this discussion is going in circles. This appears to me to be an adversarial ploy. Or at least a very confused understanding of the gospel.

Using your own reference in Romans 1: 20 clearly states with your emphasis repeated many times that Paul taught the Roman Saints that the invisible God had been clearly revealed by the Prophets from the creation.

I think My understanding of the full gospel is sufficient for my salvation and your missionary work on this site is fruitless. A narrow closed mind is very fertile soil for the adversary to sow his seeds of confusion and misunderstanding. Kinda like concrete "all mixed up and settled."

I know the Lord would open your eyes and ears if you would humbly seek truth wherever found.

May the Lord bless you to that end.

Darrel

[LittleNipper]

You know, I think this discussion is going in circles. This appears to me to be an adversarial ploy. Or at least a very confused understanding of the gospel.

Using your own reference in Romans 1: 20 clearly states with your emphasis repeated many times that Paul taught the Roman Saints that the invisible God had been clearly revealed by the Prophets from the creation.

I think My understanding of the full gospel is sufficient for my salvation and your missionary work on this site is fruitless. A narrow closed mind is very fertile soil for the adversary to sow his seeds of confusion and misunderstanding. Kinda like concrete "all mixed up and settled."

I know the Lord would open your eyes and ears if you would humbly seek truth wherever found.

May the Lord bless you to that end.

Darrel

I'm sorry but Romans 1:20 say the following:

Romans 1:20 (New International Version)

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

[Faded]

I'm sorry but Romans 1:20 say the following:

Romans 1:20 (New International Version)

20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

I'm completely at a loss. What exactly is being debated now?

[pam]

Thread is now closed.