Only mentioned once.

[rameumptom]

There is a huge Grand Canyon sized chasm between preaching modalism, such as the United Pentecostal Church does, and trying to explain the Trinity using analogies that could be misconstrued as modalistic. I've heard the water one used--but correctly, in that the Trinity was only said to be modeled when water/ice/gas appeared simultaneously (I guess there is a temperature at which they do). All analogies tend to falter somewhere, and can be accused of modalism or tritheism, if carried too far.

It may be unfair to condemn any self-identified Christian as not being one. On the other hand, the wedge question would be a non-Christian asking, "So...just what do you Christians believe?"

Water becomes ice and boils at the same time when in a vacuum.

And yes, I agree that explaining an imperfect model would be to use a modalistic model. However, I've never had anyone explain it to me in those terms.

I have no problem with anyone being modalistic or Trinitarian. I believe them to be as much Christians as I am, just with different views on some things. I'd just like some consistency in belief, because there are a lot of Mormons out there that think Trinitarianism is a form of modalism, simply because that's how it was explained to them by their Trinitarian friends.

[Maureen]

I'd just like some consistency in belief, because there are a lot of Mormons out there that think Trinitarianism is a form of modalism, simply because that's how it was explained to them by their Trinitarian friends.

Or it could be a case of misunderstanding. There have been several times that the Trinity has been explained the correct way on this forum (3 persons, one God), but people still process the explanation as meaning 3 beings and one being or 3 persons and one person. Sometimes if a person does not agree with the explanation, they may not really hear of what is being said.

[prisonchaplain]

I have no problem with anyone being modalistic or Trinitarian. I believe them to be as much Christians as I am, just with different views on some things. I'd just like some consistency in belief, because there are a lot of Mormons out there that think Trinitarianism is a form of modalism, simply because that's how it was explained to them by their Trinitarian friends.

My problem with Modalists is that they deny the nature of God, as taught by the church for 2000 years. I'm not sure what this problem means, but it sure makes difficult the answer to that earlier question, "So, just what do you Christians believe...about God?" If we can't have "like precious faith" about something so foundational, fellowship is hard. I guess I can shout "Howdy Christian brother," to the modalist on the other side of the doctrinal barbed wire fence.

IMHO, LDS will encounter modalist-like explanations of the Trinity as an over-correction to the tri-theistic-sounding teaching of the Godhead that you offer. We often go to extremes to make our point. Democrats are communist fellow travelers, Republicans want to suck the blood out of the poor, and rape and pillage the Earth. "Mormons are polytheists," and Trinitarians are Modalists.

In reality Trinity is Father God, Son God, Holy Spirit God, each a distinct person, yet all the One true and living God. How can three persons be one essential being? That is the mystery, and that is the teaching.

[Maureen]

In reality Trinity is Father God, Son God, Holy Spirit God, each a distinct person, yet all the One true and living God. How can three persons be one essential being? That is the mystery, and that is the teaching.

I, for one, like this mystery. For me if God wasn't mysterious he wouldn't be God.

[Misshalfway]

I, for one, like this mystery. For me if God wasn't mysterious he wouldn't be God.

I think I can really respect this. It makes me feel your trust for something higher and wiser than you.

I think that God IS mysterious and that the truth about the eternities is a giant mystery as well......until revelation happens. If God is willing to show himself to a person to better illustrate who and what he is, then does this make him any less powerful or loving or all knowing?

[prisonchaplain]

Miss Halfway, I'll even grant you that the LDS Godhead retains mystery. Discussions about eternal progression, and about the relationship between our God, the previous Gods, and the eternal intelligence we all contain can be quite mysterious indeed.

[AnthonyB]

To be honest there are good many things about the LDS Godhead that despite my time here, I still find very confusing and mysterious. (And no I'm not looking for another Godhead thread cause despite the several I've been involved I haven't been able to get a clearer idea on some things.)

[Justice]

Anthony, God said He created man in His image... male and female.

Do you think God is alone? Is He both male and female? Or, does He, per chance, have a wife that He patterned women after?

[rameumptom]

My problem with Modalists is that they deny the nature of God, as taught by the church for 2000 years. I'm not sure what this problem means, but it sure makes difficult the answer to that earlier question, "So, just what do you Christians believe...about God?" If we can't have "like precious faith" about something so foundational, fellowship is hard. I guess I can shout "Howdy Christian brother," to the modalist on the other side of the doctrinal barbed wire fence.

Ramemeumptom: And there are some who think Mormons also deny the nature of God. For me, it is an issue of whether we believe in Christ and his atonement. That is the only thing the scriptures state is necessary for salvation. Of course, the LDS addendum is that faithfulness, knowledge, and righteous works give us greater glory within that salvation.

IMHO, LDS will encounter modalist-like explanations of the Trinity as an over-correction to the tri-theistic-sounding teaching of the Godhead that you offer. We often go to extremes to make our point. Democrats are communist fellow travelers, Republicans want to suck the blood out of the poor, and rape and pillage the Earth. "Mormons are polytheists," and Trinitarians are Modalists.

Rameumptom: Which is fine, IF the over-correction is somewhat or sometimes noted. However, I find that when I question many Trinitarians, they don't realize they are speaking in modalist terms. Many, in fact, do not know of the controversy between modalism and Trinitarianism, or that St Augustine labeled modalists as heretics.

In reality Trinity is Father God, Son God, Holy Spirit God, each a distinct person, yet all the One true and living God. How can three persons be one essential being? That is the mystery, and that is the teaching.

Rameumptom: And in many respects this definition actually beings LDS closer to Trinitarian belief than the modalists are. If in discussing the term "being" we reference the Godhead as "one being" in all form and function except physical body, then we are basically on the same wave length.

[Misshalfway]

This thread has been very enlightening. It is somewhat sad to me that our beliefs really are closer than we think, yet there is still a great divide between us on this issue.

[prisonchaplain]

Misshalfway, while there are serious differences, perhaps your sadness should be seasoned with hope. How often do LDS/Evangelical conversations highlight similarities that can at least lead to "bridges of understanding?"

[prisonchaplain]

Ram, I want to state publicly that you demonstrate an impressive and empathetic understanding of evangelical teaching, while gracefully and clearly presenting LDS instruction. Kudos!

[Misshalfway]

Misshalfway, while there are serious differences, perhaps your sadness should be seasoned with hope. How often do LDS/Evangelical conversations highlight similarities that can at least lead to "bridges of understanding?"

Well, at least when they have you inside them! You are a kind man, PC. Someone I respect because you are able to do just that.

[its_Chet]

Misshalfway, while there are serious differences, perhaps your sadness should be seasoned with hope. How often do LDS/Evangelical conversations highlight similarities that can at least lead to "bridges of understanding?"

As often as the participants in that conversation are as polite and respectful as you two are.

In other words, not often enough. But I'll take what I can get.

[rameumptom]

Ram, I want to state publicly that you demonstrate an impressive and empathetic understanding of evangelical teaching, while gracefully and clearly presenting LDS instruction. Kudos!

PC,

It's easy to have a very great discussion with quality Christian folk, as yourself. And I believe in using respect in regards to others' beliefs, as I would wish my own beliefs would be respected.