Trinity

[Guest Kamperfoelie]

Wow this is really doing my head in

I thought it was more a matter of watching the same program on two different TV's. Though the reception was more clear on one set than the other, you were watching the same program.

I also understood that in the hereafter there would be no more need for seperate TV's coz we would join the 'studio' audience, ie that we would be in the presence of the one God.

If this is not so, then which is the more powerful, the first among equals? Also i dont think i will be able to get my head around the notion of multiple allknowing, omnipresent omnipotent beings. It s like saying multiple universes... it sounds like dividing by zero.

[Jason_J]

The problem is that if you ask 10 non-LDS Christians for a defination of Trinity you will get at least 4 or 5 different definations (even within the same denomination)

I agree, and this is something that I have noticed as well (and is also briefly mentioned in the FARMS Review article I linked to earlier). The problem is that people do not take the time to actually understand what is being said, and in the case of the Trinity, the meaning of words is especially important. Words such as "being" and "substance" are glossed over, especially when "being"="person" in modern language. Then people resort to analogies (such as the ice/water/steam or three leaf clover) that further confuse the issue. Then people that aren't actually knowledgeable on the Trinity attempt to define it, and some do so erroneously. In my reading on the Trinity, I have found that the more read the person is, the more consistent the definition of the Trinity is, and the less likely that the person will give modalism as Trinitarianism, for example.

I am quite confident in my understanding of and explanation of the Trinity doctrine, as I base it on 1) the Catechism of the Catholic Church; 2) Catholic Church council writings; 3)the writings of multiple Catholic authors. I have seen the Trinity explained numerous times by various traditional Christians, in books, articles, as well as other forums. I am also familiar with the heresies (from the viewpoint of Trinitarianism) of modalism (which is the viewpoint that is most commonly presented as Trinitarianism) and Arianism.

[Jason_J]

Jason_J, where have you been all this time. You explain the Trinity so well, I can't imagine why you would want to give it up if you do decide to convert. Along the lines of how to explain one substance (divinity) with 3 persons, I'm adding this nursery rhyme:

Well, even if I convert, I will still remain knowledgeable on Catholicism. I prefer to critique something that is actually true, and not the straw man that is too often critiqued by people (and I'm sure that both Catholics and Mormons can agree that "antis" of both religions frequently argue against a straw man).

The fact is that, even though the Trinity is certainly more similar to the Godhead than either side tends to admit (perhaps because of lack of familiarity with either), it is still incompatible with LDS theology, and one could not be a Trinitarian and be LDS. A number of the Trinitarian views are not acceptable in LDS theology, including:

-the incorporeality of the Father. Mormonism is clear that the Father has a [glorified] body of flesh and bones. Trinitarians believe that the Father is solely a spirit.

-the "eternality" of the Son. Mormonism posits that Jesus Christ is literally the [first-born] Son of the Father. He is eternal in the sense of "intelligences", and we are all eternal, however there was a time when there was the Father, and the Son did not exist (in the way He did in the pre-mortal existence). Trinitarianism posits that the Son has eternally existed as the Son, there never was a time when He did not exist, and He is co-equal in His divinity with the Father.

[Jason_J]

The more I read definitions and contradictory descriptions of The Trinity the more confusing it becomes. Where does this doctrine originate?

I have never seen contradictory descriptions of the Trinity given by official sources, as in, from documents by the churches that profess belief in the Trinity. All contradictions in definition of the Trinity comes from a misunderstanding of what the Trinity is actually talking about by a number of Trinitarians themselves.

[Maureen]

Jason_J, I'm curious. If I may ask some questions - Do you believe God is a trinity or are you coming to accept that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones? Personally for me, I am a trinitarian and will always be, I could not change.

[WillowTheWhisp]

So do Trinitarians not believe that God the Father has a seperate body?

[Guest]

So do Trinitarians not believe that God the Father has a seperate body?

God the Father and the Holy Ghost do not have physical bodies in the Catholic Trinity. Jesus Christ is the only one who was "made flesh".

[Jason_J]

Jason_J, I'm curious. If I may ask some questions - Do you believe God is a trinity or are you coming to accept that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones? Personally for me, I am a trinitarian and will always be, I could not change.

I'm coming to accept that the Father is corporeal. I find much Biblical support, as well as support from a number of ancient Judeo-Christian teachings.

Are you a Trinitarian and LDS?

[Maureen]

Are you a Trinitarian and LDS?

I am Trinitarian as in Protestant-Lutheran. I have LDS family/friends and enjoy LDS church history.

[Guest]

Are you a Trinitarian and LDS?

I don't think it is possible to be both.

[WillowTheWhisp]

God the Father and the Holy Ghost do not have physical bodies in the Catholic Trinity. Jesus Christ is the only one who was "made flesh".

So in those beliefs did Jesus exist before he was "made flesh"?

[Jason_J]

I don't think it is possible to be both.

Agreed, I just assumed that Maureen was LDS.

[Jason_J]

So in those beliefs did Jesus exist before he was "made flesh"?

Yes he did. However He did not have a body until He incarnated (or was born of the Virgin Mary). He died, was bodily resurrected, and bodily ascended to Heaven, and that's why He has a body in Trinitarianism.

[WillowTheWhisp]

And does the Holy Ghost also exist eternally in Trinitarian belief?

[prisonchaplain]

The Holy Spirit, the Father, and the Son are alone in being eternal, in Trinitarian belief.

[bytebear]

A number of the Trinitarian views are not acceptable in LDS theology, including:

-the incorporeality of the Father. Mormonism is clear that the Father has a [glorified] body of flesh and bones. Trinitarians believe that the Father is solely a spirit.

-the "eternality" of the Son. Mormonism posits that Jesus Christ is literally the [first-born] Son of the Father. He is eternal in the sense of "intelligences", and we are all eternal, however there was a time when there was the Father, and the Son did not exist (in the way He did in the pre-mortal existence). Trinitarianism posits that the Son has eternally existed as the Son, there never was a time when He did not exist, and He is co-equal in His divinity with the Father.

Ok, so I liked your example of the copper in the box, and I wonder if I can use that to examine the concerns above. If we equate copper with God, and the bracelet with Christ, can we say that the substance of Christ is eternal (copper always existed), but was at some point turned into a bracelet? So it is with the substance of Christ, which was perfect even as an intellegence, and was God from the beginning.

Taking that a step further, we as humans have the potential to become a pure copper item (a ring, or maybe a nice broach). But it takes purification through Christ.

As for God the Father having a body, I really don't understand the issue. Jesus had/has a body. It seemed quite important for him and the resurrection is pivotal to Christian belief, and yet, somehow God is merely spirit? So is God 3/3 spirit? Or is God 2/3 spirit (Father and HG are spirit and Jesus is corporeal) and if God is 2/3 spirit according to the trinity, then why is it so different if LDS believe God is 1/3 spirit?

Edited February 5, 2010 by bytebear

[Jason_J]

Ok, so I liked your example of the copper in the box, and I wonder if I can use that to examine the concerns above. If we equate copper with God, and the bracelet with Christ, can we say that the substance of Christ is eternal (copper always existed), but was at some point turned into a bracelet? So it is with the substance of Christ, which was perfect even as an intellegence, and was God from the beginning.

Taking that a step further, we as humans have the potential to become a pure copper item (a ring, or maybe a nice broach). But it takes purification through Christ.

Interesting, I guess this does approximate the LDS view.

As for God the Father having a body, I really don't understand the issue. Jesus had/has a body. It seemed quite important for him and the resurrection is pivotal to Christian belief, and yet, somehow God is merely spirit? So is God 3/3 spirit? Or is God 2/3 spirit (Father and HG are spirit and Jesus is corporeal) and if God is 2/3 spirit according to the trinity, then why is it so different if LDS believe God is 1/3 spirit?

Trinitarians do not speak in terms of fractions when referring to God (and I think saying things like "God is 2/3 spirit" confuses the matter). What Trinitarians believe is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are spirit. When the Son incarnated, He of course had a body. Jesus Christ died, was bodily resurrected, and bodily ascended to Heaven. Therefore, He still has His body. That's how Trinitarians know that the Son has a body, because He came to earth and was born into one. Trinitarians do not see the Father not having a body as somehow limiting Him.

The issue Trinitarians have with the LDS Godhead is of course the belief that the Father has a body of flesh and bones. Especially because it is known why Christ has a body (because He came to the earth), the question that is implied from the view that the Father also has a body (basically, how did the Father receive His own body) is troubling for Trinitarians.

[Guest]

Interesting, I guess this does approximate the LDS view.

Trinitarians do not speak in terms of fractions when referring to God (and I think saying things like "God is 2/3 spirit" confuses the matter). What Trinitarians believe is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are spirit. When the Son incarnated, He of course had a body. Jesus Christ died, was bodily resurrected, and bodily ascended to Heaven. Therefore, He still has His body. That's how Trinitarians know that the Son has a body, because He came to earth and was born into one. Trinitarians do not see the Father not having a body as somehow limiting Him.

The issue Trinitarians have with the LDS Godhead is of course the belief that the Father has a body of flesh and bones. Especially because it is known why Christ has a body (because He came to the earth), the question that is implied from the view that the Father also has a body (basically, how did the Father receive His own body) is troubling for Trinitarians.

It shouldn't be though - even if you're a Trinitarian. Because, in the Catholic belief, God the Father created the earth. So, when it says on Genesis that He created man in his image, then in Catholic view that means man is in the image of God the Father - so, if God the Father doesn't have a body, then how can he have an image...

That kind of thing.

In any case, that's the thing about Trinity, Godhead, Heaven, Hell, Faith/Works, even abortion... all those glaring differences between Christians and Christianity-Rejects (yeah, that's us, LDS folks)... They all hinge on the fullness of the Plan of Salvation. Without the prerequisite of Pre-mortal existence, those things can never be explained in a way Christians can relate to. So, instead of debating Trinity versus Godhead, Faith versus Works, abortion in cases of rape or incest, we should spend all our debate time on hashing out the possibility of premortal spirits.

[Jason_J]

It shouldn't be though - even if you're a Trinitarian. Because, in the Catholic belief, God the Father created the earth. So, when it says on Genesis that He created man in his image, then in Catholic view that means man is in the image of God the Father - so, if God the Father doesn't have a body, then how can he have an image...

That kind of thing.

In the Catholic belief, God (i.e the Father, Son and Holy Spirit) created the earth. The issue of "image and likeness" also comes up, however there is an interpretive difference between traditional Christians and LDS here. LDS interpret "image and likeness" to mean a physical image. Traditional Christians do not, and see it as a more...spiritual matter, in that we have free will, wisdom, knowledge, love, morality, etc., just like God. Since Trinitarians do not believe that the Father has a physical body, it wouldn't be logical for them to interpret "image and likeness" as referring to a physical image and likeness (and of course at creation, Jesus did not have a body yet, since He did not incarnate yet).

[Flyonthewall]

I've asked some LDS on this forum, do you believe the Godhead is 3 Gods or 1 God and some have said both. That can be confusing, how is it possible to see both?

M.

There are 3 Gods in the Godhead. The members of the Godhead function as one, being one in purpose and testimony, under the direction of the Father.

The Godhead is a single organizational unit and is referred to as The One God.

This is the same concept as the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, each being God individually yet there only being one God becase they share the same substance. Think of the Godhead as being the substance

[mnn727]

For trinitarians, God is all-power, everywhere-present, and all-knowing. He is absolutely one. He exists as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit--three persons, co-equal, co-eternal, and absolutely alone in their nature and position. In contrast, humans are mortal beings, created by God out of nothing. Faithful ones will be exalted, but their eternity is future, not past. They will never be what God is, for his eternity alone is both past and future. IMHO, it is God positions vs. ours that highlights the contrast, more than the debate about substance vs. purpose, personage vs. person, and one essential God vs. one God in purpose.

Thats the classic definition, however I would challange you to ask 5 members of your congregation and see what they come up with on their own. Or what I did, I was on a Christian (non-LDS) message board frequented by people of many faiths and I asked them to define the "Trinity" Out of about 30 replies, not one was a duplicate.

Its a confusing concept for most people.

[Maureen]

So, when it says on Genesis that He created man in his image, then in Catholic view that means man is in the image of God the Father - so, if God the Father doesn't have a body, then how can he have an image...

I agree with how Jason_J has explained this but would also like to add that I consider mankind to also be a trinity - body, soul, spirit. Another way to look at man being created in the image of God.

[Jason_J]

Thats the classic definition, however I would challange you to ask 5 members of your congregation and see what they come up with on their own. Or what I did, I was on a Christian (non-LDS) message board frequented by people of many faiths and I asked them to define the "Trinity" Out of about 30 replies, not one was a duplicate.

Its a confusing concept for most people.

I think the "classic definition" is what matters, and not people's misconceptions of what the belief is actually saying.

[Jason_J]

I agree with how Jason_J has explained this but would also like to add that I consider mankind to also be a trinity - body, soul, spirit. Another way to look at man being created in the image of God.

See, this is where I believe analogies go wrong, as they may sound right, but have some fundamental mistake .

Saying that you or I is a "trinity" (i.e. trying to parallel the Trinity to man) misses that the Trinity is three Persons, not one. You and I are one person. God is three distinct Persons.

[Maureen]

Saying that you or I is a "trinity" (i.e. trying to parallel the Trinity to man) misses that the Trinity is three Persons, not one. You and I are one person. God is three distinct Persons.

I don't see how I am created as an analogy. Man exists with a body, soul and spirit, that is how he is created. Could it not be considered that this image (a triunity image) has some similarity to God's triunity image?